Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 UDC 27 ISSN 1451-0928

ÅASOPIS
Teorijsko glasilo Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu

TEOLOÃKI

Broj 9

2

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

3

Teoloãki åasopis, broj 9, 2009. godine. Izdavaå: Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu. Adi Endrea 30, 21000 Novi Sad, Srbija. Tel: +381.(0)21.469-410 Elektronska poãta: nsts@sbb.co.rs Internet stranica: www.nsts-online.org Glavni i odgovorni urednik: prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan. Urednici: mr Nikola Kneæeviñ mr Srœan Sremac. Recenzenti: -prof. dr Heleen Zorgdrager, Ukrainian Catholic University, Ukrajina, Kerk in Actie, Holandija -prof. dr Anne-Marie Kool, Karoly Gaspar Reformed University, Budimpešta, Maðarska; -prof. dr Jasmin Miliñ, Protestantsko teoloãko uåiliãte Mihail Starin, Osijek, Hrvatska; -Kevin Steger, Ph.D. Dallas Baptist University, SAD; -Hank Kanters, D.Min. World Life Centre, Kanada; i -dr Svetislav Rajšiñ, Protestantski teološki fakultet, R. Srbija Prelom: Miloã Moravek Ãtampa: MBM-plas Tiraæ: 500 primeraka ISSN: 1451-0928 UDC: 27

Izdavanje ovog åasopisa finansiralo je Ministarstvo vera Republike Srbije u okviru projekta: "Unapreœivanje verske kulture, verskih sloboda i tolerancije".

4

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 IZ UVODNIKA PRVOGA BROJA TEOLOÃKOG ÅASOPISA

Teoloãki åasopis je godiãnjak Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, u kome se objavljuju radovi profesora i studenata, istorijski dokumenti kao i letopis rada fakulteta. Meœutim, osmiãljen je tako da uskoro moæe da preraste kategoriju godiãnjaka. Åeænja duãe mi je da vidim kako Teoloãki åasopis strategijom kvasca, nenametljivo i nezadræivo, postaje platforma teoloãkog promiãljanja ovde i sada: u naãem duhovnom i kulturnom kontekstu. Upravo ovaj i ovakav kontekst nameñe obavezu ozbiljnog pristupa i tretmana pravoslavne teoloãke misli i to u punini njene istorijske dimenzije. Kontekstualna teoloãka promiãljanja, koja ovaj åasopis priæeljkuje, opravdañe svoj pridev jedino ako budu odraæavala pluralizam hriãñanskih denominacija koji karakteriãe vojvoœansku i ãiru domañu stvarnost. Iz tog razloga, ljubazno pozivam kako pravoslavne tako i katoliåke i protestantsko/evanœeoske teologe i crkvene sluæitelje da svoja bogoslovska razmiãljanja izraze u Teoloãkom åasopisu. Pouåite nas i pouåimo se. Samo istinotraæitelji su istinski Bogotraæitelji. Prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu

. 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Komparativni pristup: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 5 SADRÆAJ: Reå urednika . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Osnovne biblijske vere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . 7 NAUÅNI RADOVI Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 . 193 STRUÅNI RADOVI Petar Piliñ Duhovni aspekti bolesti . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski Traganje za neizrecivim . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Savremena pastirska sluæba crkve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the front-line . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: Pisani i slikani izvori . 141 PREGLEDNI RADOVI Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . 7 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski The Quest for the Unspeakable . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Comparative Perspective: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Foundations of Biblical Faith . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the Front-Line . . 141 OVERVIEW PAPERS Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N° 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Word Forward by the Editor-in-chief . . . . . .6 Teoloãki åasopis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 PAPER IN APPLIED THEOLOGY Petar Piliñ Spiritual Aspects of Illness . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Symbolism of the Feast of Pentakost: Written and Painted Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Contemporary Pastoral Ministry of the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . .

veñ i socioloãki. Sagledavajuñi mesto i ulogu Teoloãkog åasopisa unutar verskog konteksta naãe zemlje moæe se slobodno reñi da je njegova uloga afirmativna.humanistiåke nauke u jednu koherentnu celinu. jer svojim svehriãñanskim stavom doprinosi boljem hermenautiåkom pristupu svetopisamskog otkrivenja i same crkvene predaje.nauåni karakter.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 7 Reå urednika Kao i prethodni brojevi i ovaj broj se moæe pohvaliti sadræajem koji je interdisciplinarnog karaktera. Verujem da ñe deveti broj Teoloãkog åasopisa pre svega pomoñi åitaocima u daljem razvoju teoloãkog iskustva i saznanja i joã jednom dati svoj doprinos kako celokupnom teoloãkom promiãljanju tako i nauci uopãte. jer svojom verskom i etniåkom ãarolikoãñu na pravi naåin oslikava i naãe druãtveno okruæenje i samim tim pridonosi izgradnji tolerantnijeg druãtva uopãte. razvijajuñi pritom konstruktivni dijalog izmeœu istih. Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ . Na taj naåin dolazi do izraæaja i njegova ekumenska dimenzija. On ima ulogu da kultiviãe teoloãku misao uzimajuñi u obzir sve tri hriãñanske provenijencije. ne samo u teoloãkom veñ i u duhovnom smislu. Upravo ovo ilustruje da Teoloãki åasopis nema samo teoloãko . inkorporirajuñi tako sve druãtveno .

8 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 NAUÅNI RADOVI .

5Tarkovski Andrej diplomirani teolog Originalni nauåni rad Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog Primljeno: 11. a ono ãto je nevidqivo i skriveno nije pokuãavao da opisuje i prepriåava.tragawe za neizrecivim Rezime Stvarajuñi svoje filmove. veñ je nastojao da tanano sugeriãe i naznaåi ostavqajuñi tako prostor gledaocu da sam naåini pokret ka neizrecivom. emocionalne izraæajnosti likova i konstruisawa alegorijskih zagonetki iako mu je ovo posledwe åesto pripisivano. poniruñi u tajnu postojawa sveta i åoveka.03. Tarkovski je teæio oslobaœawu od logike linearnog narativa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 9 Irina Radosavqeviñ UDK 929:778. veñ veãtom upotrebom onih sredstava koji su svojstveni filmu kao mediju. Wegov primarni ciq bio je da kamerom uhvati samu sræ æivota u svim wegovim dimenzijama. Duhovna dimenzija wegovih filmova nije izgraœena religioznim narativom.2010 fakulteta BUmaster teorije Prihvañeno: 15. Andrej Tarkovski pripada generaciji posleratnih reæisera koji su stvarali nakon perioda dominacije epskog stila Sergeja Ajzenãtajna u kome je montaæa predstavqala . åuveni reæiser Andrej Tarkovski nastojao je da. Primatan je jak uticaj pravoslavne ikonografije i estetskih sredstava koja ona upotrebqava.com Andrej Tarkovski .03.2010 umetnosti i medija Univerziteta umetnosti u Beogradu irinarados@hotmail. gledaocu pruæi priliku za jedno autentiåno duhovno iskustvo.

takoœe kritiåar sovjetskog perioda. Metalnikov. Radnik u lewingradskoj fabrici pisao je: „Razlog zaãto Vam piãem je Ogledalo. Ali. piãe: „Film Andreja Tarkovskog je filmska ispovest. pisao: „Od velikog umetnika oåekujem. razgovara sam sa sobom“. originalne. a za ispovest je zaista potrebna hrabrost. . sovjetski kritiåar. samo monolog.nostalghia. M. Tarkovski je ukazivao i na wene nedostatke pokuãavajuñi da pronaœe prisniji i liåniji naåin izraæavawa u filmskoj umetnosti. åiji su filmovi nerazumqivi i nejasni. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. u ovom filmu dijaloga nema.2 Realnost je ipak bila malo drugaåija.10 Teoloãki åasopis. u kwizi Vajawe u vremenu on navodi delove pisama koje su mu slali poãtovaoci wegovog rada. nakon svega. prvi princip qudskih odnosa: spremnost da se qudi razumeju i da im se oproste nenamerne greãke. uæivajuñi reputaciju mraånog i opskurnog umetnika. Ako su dvoje qudi sposbni da makar jednom 1 David Wishard. wihovi prirodni neuspesi.To je. Tako.. Velika je vrlina biti kadar za sluãawe i razumevawe.. ali uvek duboke misli. ne mareñi za sagovornika.. Kuåev.. http://www. 1 A B. N° 9 osnovno izraæajno sredstvo. Iskusio je neprekidnu borbu sa cenzurom i negativnom kritikom unutar SSSR-a.Meœutim.com 2 Idem. M. zato ãto ga æivim. je o filmu Ogledalo. u kome autor. film o kome ne mogu govoriti. sa dubokim æaqewem moram reñi da je wegov film namewen uskom krugu gledalaca koji su dobro upoznati sa kinematografijom“. Stvaralaãtvo Tarkovskog je nailazilo na topao i dubok prijem kod odreœenog dela publike i taj odgovor publike ga je hrabrio da istraje uprkos svim teãkoñama. ozbiqan dijalog samnom kao gledaocem. Uvaæavajuñi veliåinu ove filmske ãkole.

Stalkera.“3 Filmovi Tarkovskog govore o åoveku. koji uspeva da uhvati æivot kao refleksiju. naãao sam se pred vratima sobe åije kquåeve. svetu. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Tarkovski je za mene najveñi. æivot kao san. o åeæwi za apsolutnim. o wegovom smislu. Po sobi u koju sam oduvek æeleo da uœem.com . 5 Robert. a drugi u doba elektriciteta. on se kretao slobodno i sa lakoñom. bilo je i drugaåijih miãqewa poput onog Fredrika Xejmsona. U svim nejasnostima i neodreœenostima Xejmson ne vidi zadivqujuñu 3 Andrej Tarkovski. Bergman je za wega govorio: „Moje otkrivawe prvog filma Andreja Tarkovskog bilo je ravno åudu. nisam nikada imao. 1989.“4 Ipak. onaj koji je stvorio novi jezik. 8. na primer. Prometej.). wegovom odnosu prema drugom åoveku. Wegova kritika5 obojena je podrugqivim odnosom prema rediteqevom „velikom misticizmu“. 1999. Umentiåka druæina ANonim. Osetio sam ohrabrewe i podsticaj: neko je izraæavao ono ãto sam ja oduvek æeleo da iskaæem a nisam znao kako. Novi Sad. jezik koji odgovara prirodi filma.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 11 iskuse isto. smatra da je glavni junak u svojoj dosadnoj stradalnoj usamqenosti kojom podseña na Hrista mnogo mawe privlaåan nego socijalno neprilagoœena varalica kako je prikazan u izvornom tekstu. Bird. a sam Tarkovski status jednog od najznaåajnijih autora svih vremena. Vajawe u vremenu. Tragaju za istinom o æivotu. do tada. Odjednom. http://www. Tokom vremena stekli su veliki broj poãtovalaca. Åak i ako je jedan æiveo u eri mamuta. posmatra kao „otuænu religioznu priåu“ i.nostalghia. prema sopstvenim neistraæenim dubinama. Beograd. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. moñi ñe da razumeju jedno drugo. komentatora. 4 Marina Tarkovska (prireœ. netrpeqiv prema bilo kakvoj alegoriji. tumaåa.

Ne uspevajuñi da sagleda celinu wegovog dela. „poetski film“ se svojim slikama udaqava od åiweniånog i konkretnog u oslikavawu stvarnosti afirmisawem sopstvenog ustrojstva i celovitosti. na pogreãnoj strani. Tako shvañen simbol . Ipak ñe biti da u filmovima A. Za razliku od alegorije koja predstavqa formu u kojoj konaåno teæi da se u beskonaånom poniãti i ukine.12 Teoloãki åasopis. na æalost. alegorijama i drugim stilskim figurama u kojima Tarkovski vidi opasnost od udaqavawa filma od sebe samog. pretenziji na umetnost. N° 9 estetiku Tarkovskog veñ samo alegoriju i ideologiju. Xejmson je smatrao da Tarkovski pokuãava da religiozni sadræaj svojih dela opravda. Ne prigovara toliko „religioznom sadræaju“ koliko „umetniåkoj pretencioznosti“. navodno visokom umetnoãñu i duboko æali nad „trenutnim sovjetskim religioznim trendom“ koji vidi kao straãnu zarazu. Ipak. Za wega je usporenost kretawa kamere i glumaca „nepodnoãqiva za sve osim za najvernije poklonike Tarkovskog“. potcewujuñi estetiku i strukturu wegovih filmova. odnosno. On odbacuje postojawe umetniåke autonomije Tarkovskog i wegov opus shvata samo kao izraz wegovih teorijskih postavki. Sam Tarkovski je bio protivnik alegorije u filmu. Tarkovskog ne nalazimo jasno i nedvosmisleno iskazan ideoloãki diskurs i da se o takvom diskursu moæe govoriti samo ako se prethodno upoznati autorovi stavovi uåitaju u wegove filmove. a ne samo kao religioznu alegoriju ili izraz odreœene ideologije. zadivqen je pred wegovom sposobnoãñu da uhvati „istinu u mahovini“ i „momente u kojima elementi govore“. Po wemu. On daje æivot metaforama. Xejmson odbacuje Tarkovskog kao umetnika (wegovo delo vidi kao neuspeli pokret jednog moraliste ka umetniåkom diskursu) zarad Tarkovskog kao alegoriste (mada je sam Tarkovski iskazivao nepoverewe prema alegoriji) koji je uvuåen u ideoloãki konflikt i to. simbol je beskonaåno koje se izraæava u konaånom. Ova kritika odaje izvesnu nemoguñnost wenog autora da prodre dubqe u umetniåki diskurs Tarkovskog i da osmotri wegovo delo kao celinu.

„Umetnost åini beskonaånost dodirqivom“. Smatrao je da svaki gledalac treba sam da doæivi film. cit. . On je oblikovan prirodnim procesom. ali kao sredstva za iskazivawe neiskazivog pri åemu ono ãto je upotrebqavao kao simbol nikada nije gubilo svoje bukvalno znaåewe da bi mesto ustupilo nekom drugaåijem. kada u svojoj arkani obelodawuje jezik nagoveãtaja i zbliæavawa s neåim ãto ne moæe biti objaãweno.. Nije neophodno otkriti znaåewe simbola. poput kristala.. 6 Andrej Tarkovski.Simboli ne mogu biti drugaåije izraæeni niti objaãweni. koristio je simbole. i u svojoj najveñoj dubini ostaje nedokuåiv. U „Vajawu u vremenu“ on navodi Vjaåeslava Ivanova i wegov komentar o celovitosti umetniåkog dela koje naziva simbolom i taj navod najboqe govori o wegovom viœewu upotrebe simbola: „Simbol je istinit samo onda kada je neiscrpan i neograniåen u svojim znaåewima. Uistinu. i suoåeni sa tajnim znaåewem u wihovom totalitetu.6 Tarkovski je smatrao da film kao celina treba da predstavqa simbol i nosi znaåewe. On ima mnogo lica i misli.. parabola i poreœewa. da ga posmatra kao ãto se posmatraju zvezde ili more. govorio je. veñ disati onim åime oni diãu. Ono ãto je Tarkovski æeleo da izbegne jeste nametnuto intelektualno tumaåewe svojih dela i optereñenost gledalaca tim tumaåewem. dok unutar filma simboli lako postaju kliãei koji ga liãavaju realnosti i æivotnosti. Ipak.. on je monada i zato po ustrojewu razliåit od kompleksnih i razloæivih alegorija.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 13 bi se mogao povezati sa teæwom Tarkovskog da kroz prikazivawe neposredne stvarnosti iskaæe i ono beskonaåno... mi smo bespomoñni“. boqem i uzviãenijem znaåewu koje tek treba odgonetnuti veñ je neposredno delovalo na gledaoca gradeñi celinu i wen smisao. 46. op. neposredno i emocionalno. ãto je nesaopãtivo reåima.

emocionalnoj izra7 8 Robert Bird. ali da su retki trenutci u kojima reæiser uspe da postigne joã neko znaåewe. Sami glumci sa kojima je radio svedoåe da je wegovo reæirawe uglavnom bilo ograniåeno na pozicirawe u prostoru i pokret. Ibid. to jednostavno znaåi da ne radi i niãta osim toga. ikonom koja se odupirala linearnoj perspektivi. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Tarkovski je æeleo da kamerom uhvati sræ æivota i stvarnosti. tvorca sveta koji gotovo postaje stvarnost jer u wemu nema niåeg ãto bi se pokazalo veãtaåkim. „U posledwih nekoliko godina samo je jedan reæiser uspeo da ostvari åudo. moæete jedino stvoriti wenu sliku“.14 Teoloãki åasopis. Nalazimo joã jednu potvrdu sliånosti wegovog stila sa sredwevekovnim sakralnim slikarstvom.7 Sliku koja je plod liånog doæivqaja i opaæawa stvarnosti i wenih razliåitih dimenzija. London. . a to je Andrej Tarkovski“. Reaktion Books. ravni åudu. dok je uporno izbegavao da sa wima razgovara o onome ãto bi trebalo da misle ili oseñaju. 73. Kod wega je sve izbrisano skoro do taåke neizraæajnosti. tako. 71. Svojim studentima je govorio : „Nije moguñe fotografisati stvarnost. poput Bresona odbacivao psihologizaciju likova. 2008. ali je bio svestan da je to u apsolutnom smislu nemoguñe i da je film ipak iluzija. namernim ili nasilnim u odnosu na jedinstvo. Smatrao je da je apsurdno traæiti objektivnu istinu te da postoje samo liåne istine.“8 Tarkovski je. Breson je bio wegov veliki uåiteq: „U svojim filmovima Breson se pretvara u demijurga. N° 9 Poqski reæiser Kãiãtof Kiãlovski je jednom prilikom rekao da ukoliko je na filmu prikazan upaqaå koji ne radi. odnosno. To je izraæajnost koja je dovedena do takve preciznosti i lakonizma da prestaje da bude izraæajna.

åak je za film Andrej Rubqov bio kritikovan zbog naturalizma pojedinih scena. ali je na kraju. Donatas Banionis je govorio da se åesto oseñao kako prosto pozira. pogled ka unutra. sneg u crkvi. jedna od karakteristika ikone. utisaka i raspoloæewa. ruska Golgota. likovi Tarkovskog mogu izgledati bezizraæajno dok se ne sagleda bogatstvo razliåitih pogleda uperenih na wih sa svih moguñih strana. svojstveno ikoni). U wegovim slikama meãaju se naturalistiåko i numunozno.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 15 æajnosti likova i alegorijskim zagonetkama. Vrhunac izraæajnosti jeste da bude na svom odgovarajuñem mestu. ka subjektivnoj percepciji dogaœaja je ono ãto proæima sve wegove filmove. na primer. Ili scene Ivanovih snova ili señawa nasuprot realistiånim slikama rata u Ivanovom detiwstvu. Jedinstven. wegova nevidqiva. Wega interesuje i druga. ali se na wemu ne zaustavqa. Trebalo bi da bude autentiåno jedinstven. Tarkovski insistira na realizmu. unutraãwa realnost. realnog åoveka. Tarkovski je postavio temeqe i za tehnike upotrebqene u narednim filmovima. Marija i deca u sceni señawa u Nostalgiji ãto je postignuto jednostavnim pretråavawem glumaca sa jednog na drugo mesto kad izaœu iz kadra. da gledalac ne primeti da on zapravo glumi. u Andreju Rubqovu. ponovo. snova i maãte. ãto je. takoœe. javqawe mrtvog Teofana. duhovna dimenzija. Zanimqivo da se kod wega javqa i prisutnost istih likova na dva razliåita mesta u jednom istom neprekinutom kadru (ãto je. glumac bi trebalo da prikaæe obiånog. ali ne izraæajan. kao ãto su let balonom. Realistiåne scene æivota sredwevekovne Rusije su u Rubqovu izmeãane sa scenama izmeœu sna i jave. Ogoqeni realizam dostupan qudskom oku za wega nije kraj priåe o onome ãto æeli da zabeleæi. señawe. Po Tarkovskom. slike i narativa. . sve izgledalo drugaåije. svet onakav kakav je kad proœe kroz prizmu qudskog liånog doæivqaja. Reãavawe odnosa izmeœu ikone i filma. Kao i figure na ikoni. San. subjektivni svet misli i oseñawa. a ne glumi.

Pod pojmom poetskog u filmu nije podrazumevao teæwu ka lirizmu i romantici. wemu veoma draga. Uglavnom koristi ograniåenu paletu boja. autor jednog eseja 9 Robert Bird. ãto je vidno u Stalkeru. koristio kao jako izraæajno sredstvo da prenese odreœeno raspoloæewe ili emociju. a konfuzna i haotiåna simfonija wenog mrmqawa neprimetno prelazi u istinsku muziku.nostalghia. Boju je. Tarkovski se seña da je dvadeset puta restruktuirao film pre nego ãto ga je zavrãio. takoœe.16 Teoloãki åasopis. na primer. N° 9 I u teoriji i u praksi Tarkovski je nastojao da se oslobodi logike linearnog narativa i pribliæi logici poezije. takoœe se mogu razumeti kao jedno poetsko sredstvo buduñi da podseñaju na poeziju. Auditivni pejzaæ filma kao da postoji paralelno sa vizuelnim i kao da dolazi sa nekog drugog mesta. dok je Rubqov sniman u crno-beloj tehnici.com . Smewivawe dugaåkog kadra i brze montaæe. jambiåki pentametar. Tarkovski upotrebqava i isprekidan i nepodudaran zvuk stvarajuñi tako auru „ontoloãke neodreœenosti“: “Åini se kao da sama Priroda poåiwe åudesno da govori. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics.“9 Zvukovi kod Tarkovskog se neobjaãwivo pojavquju i nestaju åesto varajuñi uho i u pogledu svog izvora. a dogaœaji iz tri razliåita vremenska perioda prikazana izmeãano. Ivanovo detiwstvo je bio pravi skok u evoluciji ruskog filma svojom narativnom strukturom zasnovanoj na asocijativnim vezama i tananim prelazima izmeœu sna i jave. åak monohtromnu. Ipak. najboqi primer nelinearnog narativa predstavqa film Ogledalo u kome je potpuno napuãten vremenski kontinuitet. odnosno varijacije u ritmu samog filma. haiku poezija. http://www. Andrea Trpin. veñ slagawe slika u procesu asocijacija kao ãto to åine pesnici. stvarawe slike raspoloæewa i atmosfere kako je to åinila.

on je uvek liåan jer ga oblikuje qudski pogled. London. kao ãto se filmski likovi bore sa sopstvenom sposobnoãñu da imaju veru“. 51-69. Crkvu odlikuju åvrsti uspravni stubovi i neæni lukovi. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Prirodu predstavqa jednostavan tok koji upija qudski pogled. potoci. Reaktion Books. Snimajuñi Nostalgiju nije æeleo da je prikaæe turistiåki kroz najlepãa mesta i predele.je najåeãñe prikazana kao plodna i æiva. Svako od tih prostora se razlikuje po osobenom vizuelnom naponu koji nastaje ukrãtawem pogleda kamere sa pogledima likova i gledalaca. voda (kiãa. Nikada nije samo dekorativan ili informativan.10 Takav zvuk destabilizuje. koja se nikad do kraja ne razreãava.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 17 na temu zvuka u filmovima Andreja Tarkovskog. Kada je reå o prostoru Andreja Tarkovskog11. Robert Bird. Kuña poseduje prozore kroz koje stanari gledaju napoqe. a stranci unutra. Time Tarkovski otvara prostor gledaocu da zaviri u numinoznu stvarnost ili bar. postavi pitawe ontoloãke sigurnosti. . sneg. moæe biti da se radi i o pravoslavnom etosu qubavi prema tvorevini kao daru Boæijem koji trpi posledice åovekovog pada i åeka da bude obnovqena u svoj svojoj lepoti u 10 11 Idem. U wegovim filmovima dominiraju priroda. kuña ili dom i crkva ili svetiliãte. veñ da da prikaz Italije kroz poglede svojih likova ãto je ukquåivalo i slike nepoznatih ruãevina.. 2008. bare. a ponekad se åini i da ga uzvraña. na ivici panteizma. a wihovu postojanost remeti wihovo åesto neoåekivano pojavqivawe.. Ipak. trava. ukazuje da wegova „upotreba dvosmislenog zvuka uvlaåi publiku u borbu.) . da li da veruju u priåu. åini da ono ãto je sasvim ugodno i celovito odjednom izgleda strano i zbuwujuñe. Priroda – drveñe. modernih hotela i ogoqenih hotelskih soba.

bunker u jednom trenutku podseti na crkvu tokom liturgije. U Solarisu i Ærtvi ona je i mesto nerazreãenih porodiånih tenzija. prosuto mleko. ona kao da vidi. U Ivanovom detiwstvu Ivan ulazi na vrata u kuñu koja je skoro potpuno uniãtena kao ãto åini i Domeniko u Nostalgiji. a svetiliãte s åuvenom Madonom del Parte na wenom poåetku. nakon Katasonikove smrti. Tarkovski. plamen. Kasnije. åipka. U Ivanovom detiwstvu. oltar sa hlebom. gotovo uvek prikazuje kao dañu na selu. Kolin razbija tu atmosferu besnim zvowewem zvona. Kolin u crkvi pali cigaretu izmeœu ostataka freske Bogorodice i razbuktalog plamena. N° 9 punoñi („Jer æarkim iãåekivawem tvorevimna oåekuje da se jave sinovi Boæiji“ da bi se „oslobodila od robovawa propadqivosti“)12 Wegova priroda je gotovo slovesna. dolazi do izvesne promene. zvono. Katedrala u nadrealnom pejzaæu koji podseña na De Kirikove slike pojavquje se na kraju Nostalgije. simbolom novog æivota. sastradava i raduje se zajedno sa åovekom („Jer znamo da sva tvar zajedno uzdiãe i tuguje do sada“)13. Rim. a zanimqivo je da unutraãwost kuñe åesto ostaje neodrediva kao da prostorije mewaju svoj poloæaj. Andrej Rubqov obiluje predstavama crkvi. Na samom poåetku seqak Jefim i wegov skok sa vrha crkve. priroda je zagaœena i nepredvidiva. Kuñu. Åesti motivi u kuñi su åaãe. U Stalkeru. Nostalgija zavrãava kuñom u nestvarnom pejzaæu unutar katedrale. razume. kwige. 8. a Ærtva kuñom koja nestaje u vatri. tatarsko razvaqivawe ulaza u crkvu i ulazak u wu na 12 13 Poslanica Rimqanima 8. U Ogledalu i Nostalgiji ona se javqa samo u snovima punim åeæwe za povratkom u dom.18 Teoloãki åasopis. crkva belih zidova koja åeka da bude oslikana. dok je u Nostalgiji i Ærtvi pomalo zapostavqena da bi se Ærtva zavrãila scenom olistavawa suvog drveta kao simbolom ispuwene nade i procvetale vere. . 21. krstovi.22.

po wemu. i crkva kao mesto epifanije – Teofanovo javqawe sa onoga sveta.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 19 kowima. po wemu imao posebnu misiju i posebnu odgovornost. kako sebi tako i onima oko sebe. tako da najmawe ãto åovek moæe da uradi tokom svog æivota. ukquåen u putawu åovekovog kretawa prema onom ãto nazivamo apsolutnom istinom“. za izmirewem. zaãto åovek æivi i koji je smisao wegovog postojawa. u borbi protiv zla u nama samima. iskupqewa i ærtve. jedini drugi put je. Muåe ih pitawa vere i smisla. iscequje. za istinskim postojawem. Liãena duhovnosti umetnost odgaja u sebi svoju vlastitu tragediju. koji ne æeli – ili åak ne moæe – da pristane na opãte prihvañenu svetsku ‘moralnost’. op. Ako ne da objasni. iznad svega. ciq celokupne umetnosti je da objasni. stradawa i zla. Wegovi junaci su najåeãñe oni koji tragaju. padova i pokajawa. na æalost. Jer. Umetnik mora da teæi istini i ma koliko ta istina bila straãna. instrument wegovog saznavawa.14 Umetnost se. Ciq umetnosti je da kroz potres i katarzu uåini qudsku duãu prijemåivom za dobro i da joj priliku za jedno autentiåno duãevno iskustvo. onaj koji vodi duhovnom 14 Andrej Tarkovski. otuœenosti i zajedniãtva. a ono bar da se upita i da drugima postavi pitawe. cit. Tarkovski je smatrao da postoji analogija izmeœu potresa izazvanog umetniåkim delom i onog koje potiåe iz åisto religioznog iskustva. „Umetnost je sredstvo pripajawa sveta åoveku. raœa i utvrœuje tamo gde postoji nezasita åeæwa za duhovnim kao idealom. putuju u nepoznate svetove svog unutraãweg biña. åovek koji prepoznaje da smisao qudskog postojawa leæi. Tarkovski piãe: „Mene privlaåi åovek koji je spreman da sluæi viãem ciqu. ona ipak. Za Tarkovskog. jeste da napravi bar jedan korak ka duhovnom savrãenstvu. Zato je i video izvesnu religioznu dimenziju same umetnosti. åeznu za Biñem. . a sam umetnik je.

. Kada je neko ko ne zna da pliva baåen u vodu. ãto ga. transcendentno. a naãe svakodnevno iskustvo i sveopãti pritisak da se povinujemo åini izbor ovog drugog puta isuviãe lakim. „nadu. op.20 Teoloãki åasopis. boæansko. po naãem miãqewu. N° 9 propadawu.16 Kao dubok i odgovoran umetnik. veñ samo nenametqivo poziva na susret i opãtewe i. Stil Andreja Tarkovskog religiozni diskurs ne objavquje i ne natura. sami u wu zarone i suoåe se sa sobom i sa onostranim. „Umetnost potvrœuje ono najboqe u åoveku“. rvawem sa æivotom i wegovim smislom te su tako wegovi filmovi i svojim narativom upleteni u reãavawe neizreciva tajne postojawa ulazeñi tako u prostor duhovnog i religioznog. cit. uzvodi do samih vrata te tajne ostavqajuñi ih da poput Stalkera.. uzvodi ka jednom neizrecivom i mistiånom iskustvu.“15 Wegovi likovi su zaokupqeni sopstvenim duhovnim krizama. 15 16 Andrej Tarkovski. Andrej Tarkovski.. istanåanim oseñajem za upotrebu formalnih elemenata filma i narativa.. veru qubav. one koji na taj poziv odgovore. åini autorom koji istanåano i s merom gradi duhovnu dimenziju filma. cit. 206. Andrej Tarkovski je na ekran umeãno prenosio duboko proæivqenu istinu åovekovog postojawa u ovom svetu dotiåuñi se i wegove duhovne dimenzije. 237 . Umetnik je takoœe upravqen nekom vrstom nagona i wegovo delo produæava tragawe åoveka za onim ãto je veåno. molitvu. Za wega su svet i åovek neizrecive tajne i on svoje gledaoce. nagon govori wegovom telu koji pokret ñe ga spasiti.. åesto uprkos greãnosti samog pesnika“. unutraãwim tragawima. govorio je. Ono ãto sawa i ono åemu se nada.. op.

nostalghia. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Robert. London. 1999. http://www.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 21 Citirana dela: Bird.). Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics.com . Bird. Prometej. 2008. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. http://www. Novi Sad. (prireœ. Tarkovska. Umetniåka druæina Anonim. Wishard. Beograd.nostalghia. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Andrej. Marina.com Tarkovski. 1989. David. Vajawe u vremenu. Robert. Reaktion Books.

but through subtle suggestions and hints in order to give an opportunity to his audience to make an effort to catch a glimpse of the invisible realities by themselves.22 Teoloãki åasopis. The spiritual dimension of his films is not established on religious narrative. . emotional expressiveness of characters and allegorical constructions (though he was often criticized as too allegorical) showing strong influence of orthodox iconography and its esthetic means. His main effort was to catch the essence of life in all its dimensions. Tarkovsky tended to free his films from the logic of linear narratives. presenting the invisible without useless describing and retelling. but on skillful use of basic elements of film. N° 9 Resume Andrei Tarkovsky was a director who created his films with desire to penetrate deeply into the secret of human existence and give his audience the opportunity for an authentic spiritual experience.

bogoslovqa kao i samih hriãñana za uvek – novog i neponovqivog Gospoda Isusa Hrista. a samim tim i preutemeqenu pastirsku sluæbu Crkve.02. Liturgije.96:252 Primljeno 19. Tekst dijagnosticira taåke u kojima se takve anomalije pojavquju: nerelevantno bogoslovqe. itd.2010 Lazar Neãiñ. (Pravoslavni bogoslovski fakultet.2010 Prihvañeno: 23. relevantno i aktuelno bogoslovqe Crkve. zacementirana Liturgija. do krize razdvojenosti i ãizofrenije izmeœu Liturgije. . Univerzitet u Beogradu) (nesic.01.lazar@gmail. wegovih uåewa. zatvorenost za „drugaåijost“.com) Savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve Rezime Priloæeni tekst predstavqa pokuãaj analize savremenog stawa „pastirske sluæbe pravoslavne Crkve“ i to pre svega iz pravoslavno – bogoslovskog i kritiåkog ugla. Kroz krizu savremenog pravoslavnog bogoslovqa u Srbiji i ãire. romantiåno – epski jezik Pravoslavqa. pojmova i savremenih interpretacija. za eshatoloãku Evharistiju. i daje jedan ãiroki moguñi naåin da se oni prevaziœu ili makar poånu da se prevazilaze i to pomoñu koncepta „dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. otvorenosti Crkve. bogoslovqa i crkvene poboænosti. tj.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 23 UDK 281.

uvek – iznova – okuãano. uvek – neponovqivo sazreva. doæivqaja. „ispravnost“ naãih stavova. niti iãta ãto potseña na neãto dato i zavrãeno. dogaœa. „ortodoksnost“ naãe hriãñanske pravovernosti pred „bezboænim svetom“. neki susret moæda? Jedno neponovqivo otkrivawe „drugosti“ Boga. definicija.. nije samo klasiåan „govor i nauk o Boæanstvu“. „opravdawe“ za crkvenu samoizolaciju? Ili je bogoslovqe neãto „drugo“..24 Teoloãki åasopis. Bogoslovqe. pre svega. Da li je bogoslovqe tu da „osigura“ naãu poboænost. . dakle. Bogoslovqe je upitanost. åoveka. niti „definicija Boga“. jedno integralno obuhvatawe svih åovekovih razmiãqawa. i qubav – Boæiju stalno – primajuñe. otkrivawe neotkrivenog.Bogoslovqe i pastirska sluæba Crkve u XXI veku Sredstva pojmovnog miãqewa su suviãe siromaãna da bi izrazila veånu beskonaånost Emil Sioran Ãta je bogoslovqe? Ãta bi moglo da bude bogoslovqe? Da li je to skup sistema. pokuãaj neopisivog opisa susreta. Bogoslovqe je nikad – do – kraja – ispriåana priåa o onima koji se qube. neãto mnogo „drugaåije“ od svega ãto smo dosada åuli o wemu?! Bogoslovqe svagda jeste opis. iskaza. æivota. Zacementirano. izreka i poslovica o Bogu pothrawenih u muzejskoj zbirci Crkve koje åuåe u fasciklama na policama kabineta i åekaju da budu izvaœene u trenucima kada „ i Crkva treba da kaæe svoje“?! Ili je bogoslovqe neãto drugo. opitno. riziåno – bezdano. Bogoslovqe je. Bogoslovqe se zbiva. qubavi izmeœu Svete Trojice i åoveka. sveta. prizivajuñe. suæivota. veåito epikleptiåko . veåno – biñevno – otkrivajuñe. deãava. moguñnost nemoguñeg. N° 9 1.

patriotizma. i to posebno kada znamo da danas i nije baã sve tako jednostavno i lako. 3 Temeqno istraæivawe ranih hriãñanskih molitvi. Bogoslovqe nema sve odgovore na sva pitawa. „druãtvenih i veånih vrednosti“. åekaju da vide ishod borbe bogoslovqa i Onoga koga bogoslovqe treba. Jedinom „misijom“ koju Crkva moæe danas pruæiti. mewa obiåaje. ni u bogoslovqu ni u æivotu. Bogoslovqe je ono evharistijski – epikleptiåko i qubavno – åeæwivo nadajuñe – se – iãåekivawe i neumoqivi vapaj: „Doœi Gospode“!3 Bogoslovqe je uznemiravawe onog nekrofilskog. konvencionalnog i nominalnog „hriãñanstva“ samodovoqnog od svojih „dostignuña“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 25 Bogoslovqe nije odgovor na „dilemu Boga“! Bogoslovqe je i samo u dugaåkom redu nauka koje „muåi Bog“. „U Pismu su svi odgovori“. Razlikom liånog qubavnog susreta! Razlikom onog Jevanœelskog: „Doœi i vidi“1. bezdan neotkriveni. tekstova. samo bogoslovqe se baca u bezdan moguñnosti. ali i moguñnost tragiånog neodnosa sa „drugima“. jer se ono bavi Onim koji krãi zakone.. ãto je danas zakon postojawa.2 Pogreãno je uverewe o bogoslovqu kao åuvaru „Boæijih zakona“. zapisa. Bogoslovqe je rizik. „pravoslavnih vrednosti i obiåaja“. Ali. naæalost. rizikujuñi sve do samog svog biña. „Sveti Oci su odgovorili na sva pitawa“. 46 2 Treba iznova promisliti stare fraze prema kojima: „Vera ima odgovore na sva pitawa“. tradicije. „porodice“.. . itd. „tradicije“. itd. Bogoslovqe „nema gde glavu prikloniti“. Jedinom moguñnoãñu koja nam je joã ostala u savremenom svetu. jer se ono time ni ne bavi. sa jednom velikom razlikom. uvodi 1 Jn 1. moguñnost gledawa „drugih“. Dok ostale nauke sa distance. pruæiñe nam moæda iznenaœujuñi uvid u ovu åiwenicu prevashodnosti Dolaska Carstva nad osiguravawem druãtveno-politiåkog æivota. u samosigurnosti.

itd.26 Teoloãki åasopis. saborskih. Jn 1. mrtvu floskulu. sigurnosti i statistike (tipa: koliko sam postio. novo je samo ono istinsko uvek – novo. Novo je ono ãto dolazi. Hrista.. fensi. svagda – novo. Ãta zapravo znaåi „novi æivot“. u to „rvawe sa Bogom“. neoåekivano – novo. kao „jednom – davno – novo“. Bogoslovska misao zahteva otvoreni horizont tema. Jedinog Novog. jer ne pruæa farisejsku sladuwavost morala. novost. a ne kao „svagda – neponovqivo – novo“.. tj. in. Koliko puta samo koristimo kovanicu „novi æivot“ kao obiånu. Ona osposobqava. tj. molio se. Bogoslovqe je uvek novo! Ali. leåi. N° 9 haos u harmoniju. 1 – 14 5 Ali opet. dogaœajno – novo.). jer ubija svako naãe sebence. istorijskih. veåno – novo. Koji gazi po smeñu logike ovog sveta4. åemu se nadamo. bogosluæbenih. kul. Pastirska sluæba Crkve predstavqa tek jedan „uvod“ kojim se åovek uspravqa i upuãta u taj rizik odnosa. dolazeñe – novo. ono ãto iskamo. itd. dakle novo kao iãåekujuñe – nadawe i stalno – prizivajuñe – primawe Onog Novog. nego kao od-smrti-izbavqenog i ne-viãe-u-smrti-okonåavajuñeg. ono ãto prizivamo. ne novog kao modno-zanimqivog. tj. a sve u prostoru „novog æivota“. otaåkih. trendi. itd. ãto åekamo. Novina.. u Crkvi5. Ono se ne moæe sastojati samo iz „utemequjuñih tekstova“ (svetopisamskih. Bogoslovqe je zato i tragiåno. kao jedan preævakani i nerealni termin u koji i sami malo verujemo. neponovqivo – novo. Mora takoœe biti jasno kako produæiti ono ãto su „utemequjuñi“ tekstovi 4 Mt 5. 21 – 44. za åim åeznemo. davao milostiwu – toliko ñe mi se vratiti u svetu gde pobeœuje idealna bezpristrasna pravda). koliko åesto smo svedoci da dotiånu reå „novo“ shvatamo samo u hronoloãko – istorijskom kontekstu. problema i moguñih razjaãwewa. to tek iznova treba promisliti i proæiveti.ali to je tek poåetak. .

Mestu koje je Tamo. Pisma. i to one liåno – hermeneutiåke. starih hriãñanskih tekstualnih svedoåanstva. u naãem sebiånom xepu. ujeziåavati. Evharistijom. æivotnost. Mestu koje se neprestano – gradi i Koje iznova ikoniãe i ono ãto zovemo Crkva. ali koja se dobro „ne vari“. Imajmo u vidu da ni sami sveti oci nisu odgovorili na sva pitawa!!! . ne prima.. s jedne strane i tragiku savremenog æivota. tekstova. Poloæiti svoju nadu jedino u ispravnost istorijskih tekstova na kojima poåiva danaãwe hriãñanstvo.. itd. Da li se analogno isto to deãava i onom bogoslovqu koje nema snage da svari „teæinu i ozbiqnost“. (Poznato je da hrana. hermeneutika uniãtewa smrti. buduñi da se u – nesigurnosti 6 Npr. otaåke proãlosti. muåeniãtvom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 27 uåinili6. „predawima“. iskustvom.. Zato ona treba da bude osloboœena svakog kopirawa u korist interpretacije. æivim susretom. Mestu koje je nadnacionalno i nadteritorijalno. Bivajuñi uvek Tamo. itd. ali daleke. a pritom nemati potrebu za prizivajuñim – oæivaqavawem istih. Ono nas liãava samodopadne sigurnosti. Bogoslovqe je uvek Tamo. „obiåajima i starim praksama“. praviti. tj. ne funkcioniãe. Ono nas liãava uspavanosti. Mestu koje je Carstvo Boæije. s druge strane? Da li takvo bogoslovqe polako eutanizira savremeno hriãñanstvo?) Bogoslovqe je hermeneutika susreta izmeœu Svete Trojice i Åoveka. Samo iz tog Tamo – eshatoloãkog mi ga moæemo prizvati. viãe je nego opasno. kovawem novih reåi. ma koliko dobra i koristna bila. ustvari postaje pravi otrov za telo i polako ga usmrñuje. u ãta se zapravo danas åesto pretvara kao u jedno „areheologisawe“ po tekstualnim iskopinama slavne. na polici sebequbqa kao kakav lek protiv neistomiãqenika. udomqeno na Drugom Mestu. askezom. buduñi uvek nepotpuno – prisutno i iznova – oprisutnujuñe. idr. Bogoslovqe nije samo „tumaåewe“ Svetih Otaca. ono nas na jedan divan i smireni naåin liãava moguñnosti da ga dræimo u nekim naãim „riznicama bogoslovqa“.

savetovawa. Pokuãavajuñi da pravdawima. onaj Dogaœaj Dolaska Drugog koji jedini moæe da ga donese Ovde. Neliturgijsko bogoslovqe. molitvom. Setimo se samo o. to je parodija istine. forsirawem „pravoslavnog naåina æivota“ (!) „zaobiœemo“ susret sa Drugim. najæivotnijeg. dijaloga. Mesto izbavqewa prostora i vremena od veånog neprisustva biña. pre svega u Dogaœaju najerosnijeg. borbu-oni sve vreme ugroæavaju statiånost ‘naåina æivota’ (citat preuzet iz: Naã æivot u Hristu. od onog straãnog iskustva neprisutnosti Drugog. nije åak ni zanimqiva misao. Evharistija i bogoslovqe u taj ‘naåin æivota’ unose probleme. nespremnoãñu. „jeretiåno“ åak. zakone i „pravoslavnost naãeg naåina æivota“. Priåeãña. u Liturgiju. postom. æivotom qubavi i ærtve. gresima. plaãeñi se da ñe nam moæda saopãtiti neãto neoåekivano. N° 9 – vapi za wim i u – besmislu – svakodnevnice – traæi ono Tamo. ono Neoåekivano. tragawe. Lestviånik. Mesto na kome je „sve neãto drugo“. osluãkivawa. Liturgija je najprirodnije Mesto na kome i u kome se odigrava Dogaœaj Dolazak Drugog. 7 8 Pokajawem. u Crkvu i za Crkvu i Crkvi. najistinitijeg sjediwewa sa Wim.. 384).Aleksandra Ãmemana: „ Jer Sveta Tajna jeste eshatoloãka i kao takva se ne uklapa u ‘naåine æivota’. Bogoslovqe se „mesi“7 i unosi tamo gde mu je i mesto. æivota koji se „pre groba veñ nalazi u Vaskrsewu9“.. u koje åesto upadamo8. str. najbitnijeg. tragizam. svim onim ãto zovemo askeza ili podvig. tj. Hristov æivot u nama. poredak. nepokajawem. zapitanosti. neãto od åega bi morali da mewamo naãu zacementiranu ispravnost. mesto koje poraœa novo biñe æivota. ono Drugo.28 Teoloãki åasopis. To je Mesto razgovora. Mesto zajedniåkog spaãavawa sveta i biña od smrti. tj. tj. 1998: 45 9 .

„Nova Tvar“. osmiãqena „otvorenoãñu Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. koji neprestano iznova Dolazi. veka one govore.. Novo Jelo i novo Piñe. hermeneutiãu? 2. Da blagodarimo. proæeta. daruje. samo obiåne reåi. ono „Drugo“. da me vrate u æivot. i bez duga koji prethodi. takoœe apsolutnog dara. ili dara bez kalkulacije. saopãtavaju. Ali. Darovawe buduñeg æivota. Trpeza Carstva koje je veñ .Kriza pojmova – kritiåki pristup nadahnut „personalistiåkom ontologijom“ Nisu dovoqne reåi. poklawa. bivajuñi liturgijsko i epikleptiåko. iznenaœuje davawem.sasvim Ovde.. ãta sve ove reåi i izrazi nama danas znaåe? Ãta åoveku 21. i onim istim „Dolaskom Jedinog 10 Æak Derida ( Jacques Derrida ) ñe opisati ekonomiju dara kao naåin razmene gde se namiruje raåun: dar je uistinu dar onda kada se poklawa bez oåekivawa da se uzvrati.prisutno neponovqivo – neoåekivano . kao i celini rada.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 29 Bogoslovqe je. buduñi do Dolaska Drugog Tamo kao veñ . koji dolazeñi – donosi. Deridina teorija dara kao da nastoji da se pribliæi tajni Hristove ærtve. Æivota koji Dolazi. Blagodarewe Onome Kome mi jedino to i moæemo. . takoœe i Dar10. Bogoslovqe je blagodarewe. biñe nadahnuta. tj.sada ali ne . Novi i neprestani Dar qubavi i slobode kojim se grobovi prazne od smrti.oprisutwewe „slatke“ Hrane i Piña besmrtnosti. EKV Sva naãa promiãqawa u ovom poglavqu.

ali samo pod uslovom onog veñ mnogo puta ovde ponovqenog „osmiãqavajuñeg – prizivawa“ Novog. ikonomija. za nas. npr: • Stari pojmovi priliåe vremenu kada su nastali: Kako objasniti sebi i svetu pojmove poput: jednosuãtnost. Ovo je naã hermeneutiåki kquå kojim pokuãavamo da otvorimo vrata problema. Beograd. naziva. crkvena terminologija iz proãlosti vredna areheoloãkog prouåavawa. logosi biña. stvarawe sveta iz niåega. Vaskrsewe. N° 9 Novog i Drugog. podvig? Ãta nama predstavqa åitava enciklopedija hriãñanskih termina. Takoœe. tj. kenoza. danas Gospod Isus Hristos. pravoslavnog hriãñansva je viãe nego za pohvalu. Evharistija. ipostas. predawskog. idioma i ostalog? Jesu li ovo samo stare reåi. seña li se neko joã ãta je to Sveta Trojica? Ãta nama danas znaåe Crkva. i ostale „temeqne“ pojmove hriãñanskog uåewa? • Usahle forme crkvenog æivota ne mogu se analagno lepiti na savremenost: Æeqa za ãto autentiånijim æivqewem ranog. Pogledajmo kakav je jezik bogoslovqa danas11. naivne bajke? Ãta moæe savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve danas sa svim ovim hitnim pitawima? Pre svega.30 Teoloãki åasopis. Hrista“. spasewe. ãta danas znaåi reå Bog. post. imena. 1998. prvo da „izvadi brvno iz oka svoga“. . otaåkog. nerazdeqivost prirode. Teologija i Jezik. Jedinorodni. æeqa za ãto „monaãkijim i manastirskijim“ naåinima åekawa Dolaska 11 Sjajna studija za razmatrawe ovog problema: Stilijan Papadopulos. imenica. Carstvo Boæije. Ko je. duhovnost. pa tek onda da ukaæe na brvna i u ostalim oåima. Hriãñanska misao. Dolazeñeg. æivot veåni. Bogoslovqe je previãe zarobqeno u svoj istorijski jezik. molitva. reåi. mora da bude iskrena sama sa sobom i u najboqem asketsko – otaåkom i jevanœelskom duhu. Donoseñeg -Neoåekivanog i Buduñeg. naåin postojawa.

ono ipak danas ne moæe da bude primarno. Strah bogoslovqa da se suoåi sa savremenim „bezboænostima“ pod izgovorom romantiånog bavqewa evharistijom. 2008. i to onim mestima gde se govori o neidentitetu i nerelevantnosti savremenog hriãñanstva ( iz ovih misli pravoslavni bi mnogo mogli da nauåe). galerije. tj.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 31 Hristovog takoœe moæe imati svoju zdravu primenu samo pod uslovima da „nekako“ iznaœemo naåina da ceo svet strpamo u manastire i peñine. problemima koji su nekada davno bili aktuelni i vaœewem istih na povrãinu savremenosti. mrtvo!12 Hrabro suoåavawe sa rugobama ovog sveta tek predstoji. 12 . police. „druãtveno – politiåki – prilagodqivo“. isti je onom strahu od susreta sa drugim – bliæwim. za obiåan svet koji ostaje van tog supermen molitvenog prostora. Strah od sveta. ipak. nakaznosti åovekove svakodnevnice. mi zapadamo u oåitu nerelevantnost pred svetom. mi smo posebnu paæwu poklonili mislima zapadnog teologa Jirgena Moltmana ( Jurgen Moltmann ) u wegovoj åuvenoj kwizi „Raspeti Bog“ ( Ex Libris. Rijeka. muzeje. tj. odnosno tamo gde je ono „neproblematiåno“. vode bogoslovqe. problema. eshatologijom. ) . „Boæijom pravdom i promislom“ i zatvarawem u iste (jer se u takvim apstrakcijima jedino oseña sigurnim). „zanimqivo“. „umetniåko – vrednosno“. dehumanizacije u nauci. koncertne dvorane. Iako je istraæivawe starih problema neophodno. „religijsko“. U hriãñansko – Iako postoji obiqe literature za ovaj problem. tj. • Problemi sa kojima se bogoslovqe suoåava su bezvremeni i nerelevantni danas: Veñ pomenuto bavqewe „istorijom bogoslovqa“ tj. a posebno sa onim sasvim Drugim. Do tada. biñe dovoqni i naåini da se u qudsku i æivotnu svakodnevnicu udahne sveæ vazduh Onoga Koji „diãe gde hoñe“. idr. bacaju ga u fioke. Hristom. „istoriåno – nacionalno“.

ali i hriãñanstva. Veselin Masleãa. 13 Za pojam „traga“ u savremenoj filosofiji videti: Æak Derida. tj. Jezik savremenog bogoslovqa. ali jedno je sigurno: jezik bogoslovqa u krizi prebiva. åoveku. terminologije i problema. samo jedna „istorija teologije“ tj. Naãe bogoslovqe je. O gramatologiji. danas. tj. ali obostrano åuvaju daleko od stvarnog æivota. Sarajevo. . Sarajevo. u stvari. Pisawe i razlika. arheoloãka iskopina koja u sebi åuva tek samo trag13 nekadaãweg – davnog odnosa sa Bogom. jezika koji – ne – dopire – dodrugog Tek ovaj problem iziskuje jednu celu studiju. istorija razvoja teoloãke misli. . za koju naæalost ovde nemamo prostora. tj. • Govor o Bogu. samo jedan „objekt“ u rukama areheologa teologije. Ãahin Paãiñ. Ona je. jedna recipirana istorija teologisawa. svetu odvija se u okviru nekada – davnog – arhaiånog jezika.32 Teoloãki åasopis. drugi ga preziru. koje se nalazi „pre licem sveta“ najåeãñe je: • Onaj – koji – viãe – ne – dotiåe – svet • Onaj – koji – u – istoriji – prebiva • Zakopan – u – riznici – señawa • Onaj – koji – se – samo – seña – davnine • Sahrawen – u – kwigama • Zatrpan objektivacijama • Romantiåno – bajkovit • Epski – naivan Malo je prostora na kome bismo daqe mogli razraœivati ove postavke. N° 9 pravoslavnom taboru takvog viteza – borca joã uvek åekamo da se pojavi. jedan muzejski eksponat kome se jedni dive. 2008.

16 17 Œorœo Agamben ( Giorgio Agamben ). glavni je predstavnik ove misli. kai apolesas thn yuchn autou eneken emou eurnsei authn “ (Mt 10. 39) 18 . italijanski filozof i profesor na Torinskom univerzitetu. kao osmiãqavajuñi – od –Tamo – nas – Ovde. kretawem. rada. odgovornosti. kao stalno – dolazeñe. videti u: Kopiñ. Upravo kao veñ – sada . i to u ovom svetu post – metafizike14 na temeqima slabe ontologije15 i Boæije slabosti16. italijanski filosof i teoretiåar. odsustva smisla. Svetu i bliæwem. izvijawem napred i naviãe (dakle kao svo u kretawu i 14 Reå-kovanica za åitav jedan sistem åovekove misli posle objave „smrti Boga“. dovode nas u pitawe pred reåima Hristovim: „O eurwn thn yuchn auton apolesei autin.18 Setimo se da svaka utopija tovari obaveze na buduñnost. 2008: 5 . podviga. 2008. dotiåe se ovih tema u svom genijalnom radu “Remnants of Auschwitz”. ali ne –joã . itd. Xon Kaputo (John Caputo). danas. nemoñi. moliti se i postiti. Indiana University Press. Zone Books.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 33 Bogoslovqe. eshatoloãko – evharistijsko bogoslovqe samim svojim naporom.10. liãavajuñi sadaãwost dinamike. bez aktivne qubavi prema Hristu. kao kretajuñe – se – ka – nama. ima prizvuk nelagodnosti u svetu zalivenog nihilizmom. pokreñe iznova ovu temu u svojoj najnovijoj kwizi: “ The Weakness of God – Theology of Event”. 1999. Naivno shvañenog kao: „mi sluæimo Liturgiju“ i „molitve i posta“. Sluæiti Liturgiju. ameriåki filosof religije. svetu „posle Auãvica17“?! Bogoslovqe stalno prebiva u opasnosti od eshatoloãko – evharistijskog utopizma. dolazi i naãe preispitivawe: „Åemu joã bogoslovqe“?. 15 Œani Vatimo (Giani Vattimo). i ostale „duhovne“ radwe åiniti. Na staro pitawe: „Åemu joã filosofija“?. New York. ozbiqnosti.

ispuwene i ujeziåene dogaœajem dolaska Drugog. i mi pravoslavni ne smemo hladno zaobiñi postojawe jedne takve zanimqive i originalne misli. 1984: 5. ne smemo zaboraviti ni kolosalnu misao rimokatoliåkog teologa Hans Urs von . u kojoj taj isti jezik postaje mrtav za svoju svetu – se – obrañati upotrebu. poezija. 20 Veoma zanimqiva misao za pravoslavno bogoslovqe danas. pretvara se u jedan „klovnovski jezik“. npr. 19 Ratzinger. dodir. moæe biti pokret hriãñanske teologije na Zapadu.. idr. jer predstavqa pokuãaj onog istog neizrecivog iskaza i opisa susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka. mogu ponovo pronañi mesta u opisu onog dogaœaja o kome bogoslovqe blagovesti. gledawe. jedan jezik – susret. hriãñanska. O Teopoetici viãe videti na internet prezentaciji: http://theopoetics.net/. veñ jedan jezik svakodnevnice. tj. Poznate i razumqivo – shvatqive (srcu prijemåqive i umu osvetqavajuñe) reåi.19 Da li bogoslovqe zato potrebuje jedan novi jezik. unapred åuva sebe od pasivno – nepokretne neistine romantiåarskog eshatoloãko evharistijskog utopizma. film. N° 9 razrastawu). Bogoslovqe se. kwiæevnost. zagrqaj. Teopoetika je i nama danas poziv na jedno takvo saopãtavawe sebe svetu.ali ne u smislu ponovne pojmovno – logiåke ograniåenosti i nemoguñnosti za izraæavawe onog liåno – qubavnog. poput: susret. polako pretvara ( ili se veñ pretvorilo? ) u jezik nemuãtih bogoslovskih unutraãwih trvewa. moæda jedan meta – jezik?. a to je opet i opet susret Svete Trojice i Åoveka20. slikarstvo. sasvim Drugog. ali u okvirima svima-razumqivog i saopãtivog jezika svakodnevnog i sveopãteg qudskog æivota i iskustva. ovde preobraæene. crkvena.34 Teoloãki åasopis. Hrista. tj. qubqewe. itd. dakle. muzika. Iako svoje izvore crpi u drugim oblastima qudskog stvaralaãtva. S druge strane.. ona ostaje izvorno svetopisamska. nazvan Teopoetika (Theopoethics). nemajuñi „dah novog æivota“.

3. tj. poput Aleksandra Ãmemana (delimiåno se Baltazara (Hans Urs von Balthasar) i wegov projekat Teologike (Theologik). Koji donoseñi konstituiãe za moguñnost razgovora.Kriza crkvenog æivota (kratak pregled) U pokuãaju da odgovorimo na teãko pitawe ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude (u svetlu autentiånog crkvenog.. i samim tim dovede do jednog diskutabilnog naåina æivota u savremenoj crkvenosti. s jedne strane.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 35 Na mesto „mrtvog jezika“ treba doñi „jezik susreta“. evharistijskog i qubavno – slobodnog hriãñanskog æivota koji „zastupa“ personalistiåka ontologija). Bogoslovqe je jedno jeziåko pounutrewe opisa susreta izmeœu Onog sasvim Drugog. on nastaje u osluãkivawu Duha koji dolazi. on se gradi. Ja Crkve je potpuno „bezjeziåno“ bez Ti Drugog. Jezik bogoslovqa je jezik dijaloga. Teodrame (Theodramatik) i Teoloãke estetike (Theologische Ästhetik). jezik koji ne postoji van Drugog. tj. on ne postoji pre susreta. dolazimo do neizbeæne åiwenice i pitawa ãta sve od toga bogoslovqe nije. tj. u ãta sve moæe da mutira i pseudomorfira (kada ono nije obasjano svetlom autentiånosti pomenutog). na misao savremenih bogoslova Crkve. ili u ãta sve bogoslovqe moæe da se pretvori. Wegova prava upotreba æivi jedino u tom dogaœaju. tj. . Hrista. da ga odvede u krizu? Oslawajuñi se. Svete Trojice i onog bez – ontoloãkog – temeqa – trenutno – ovde – prisutnog. i pokuãaja da daqe razradimo probleme koje smo gore naveli. u tom deãavawu. Åoveka. monolog bogoslovskog jezika je smrt istog. koje Ja ima tek sa Ti. tj. a ne zaokruæuje istinu. Taj jezik mora iznova da najavquje..

pokuãañemo da dijagnosticiramo gde. Åoveka. H. . od Crkve kao „zajednice svetih i zajednice u svetiwi“21. kako. idr. Florovskog. iznutra doæivimo i shvatimo. 22 Radovi savremenih nam bogoslova: G. Afanasjeva. a s druge na samo liåno iskustvo naãeg parohijskog crkvenog æivota. razmatrano i moæe se nañi u mnogobrojnoj literaturi koja je svima dostupna22. naravno ne pretendujuñi da zaokruæimo sistem i zakquåimo problem. Hristosa Janarasa. Ãmemana. Georgorija Florovskog. promislimo. A. pritom åvrsto se dræeñi smernica i puteva ãto su ih savremeni pravoslavni bogoslovi (a posebno ovde aktuelna „personalistiåka ontologija“ mitropolita Zizjulasa ) odredili i dijagnosticirali. a) Bogoslovqe – Liturgija – Poboænost Na predhodnim stranama smo pouãali da osvetlimo problem onoga ãto smo nazvali „ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude“. Janarasa. i dr. jedna od najtragiånijih posledica krize jeste organsko razdvajawe bogoslovqa od evharistije i poboænosti. Pre svega. veñ da ga uz pomoñ pomenute „otvorenosti Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“ joã viãe proãirimo. i to najviãe iz liånog iskustva. savremenog druãtva. i ko je uzroånik krize. N. J. izbegavajuñi preteranu samodopadnost i kritiku. rastegnemo. o tome je veñ mnogo toga reåeno. Pre svega. bogoslovqe danas teãko dopire do uãiju sveta. kada.. I ne samo to. napisano. Ovde ñemo postaviti 21 Ãmeman. Joã tragiånije i paradoksalnije je ãto ono ne dopire ni do uãiju samih „bogoslova“ i hriãñana. Mi æelimo da proãirimo vidik ovog problema. tj.36 Teoloãki åasopis. Rekli smo veñ da zarobqeno u svoj arhaiåni jezik. 2008: 21. Iz tog ugla moæemo i uoåiti wegove danaãwe nedostatke. Majendorfa. Ali. N° 9 koristeñi wegovom razradom problema u okvirima ãeme Liturgija – Bogoslovqe – Poboænost). nama je interesantan problem „neaktuelnosti bogoslovqa za savremeni svet“.

svimapoznatu. tekstovima. itd. vaskrsewe. na Svetoj Gori Atonskoj! . duhovnost. liånost. Sveta Trojica. qubavnom. smisao? Naã odgovor je: ne. konvencionalnu. bogoslova i pesnika æivota i erosa prema Svetoj Trojici i monaãko – asketska figura oca Vasilija Gondikakisa. Veñ smo se pitali ãta danas savremenom åoveku i hriãñaninu znaåe tradicionalni temeqni pojmovi bogoslovqa. 2008: 511 – 519. istinsku punoñu. Hristos. ontologija. post. nada. Da pogledamo malo bliæe ovaj problem. askeza. a o kojoj skoro da nema pomena u savremenoj pravoslavnoj bogoslovskoj misli. kao: spasewe. Åudna je åiwenica. svrhu. Pitamo se: ima li znaåajnijeg. Crkva. o zanemarivawu SAMOG ÆIVOTA HRIÃÑANINA kao glavnom izvoru za bogoslovqe. Bog. vera. nemaju! I to ne samo u svojoj recipiranosti od strane onih koji primaju i prihvataju te pojmove. pak. pravoslavqe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 37 jednu „opasnu“ tezu o ispraæwewu pojmova i sadræaja bogoslovqa. sloboda. sve zahvaqujuñi tome ãto ne postoji 23 24 Isto. „tumaåewima“. erosnom. ãta oni govore. ãta sa sobom danas nose? Da li i daqe imaju svoju samorazumqivu. a koliko u æivom sustretu. istinitijeg i veñeg izvora bogoslovstvovawa od samog æivota neke liånosti i same Crkve i problema koje æivot donosi pred æivot svake liånosti posebno. smirewe. predstavqa laiåko bogoslovska liånost i misao poznatog Hristosa Janarasa. spisima. qubav. postajuñi glavna „inspiracija“ za susret sa Svetom Trojicom. Odvojeno od svojih izvora. odvojeno od æivota (kao moæda i „najglavnijeg izvora“24 ) bogoslovqe se polako prazni od svojih sadræaja koji poåivaju u wegovim pojmovima. predawima. posebno od evharistije kao „glavnog izvora“23. „stvarnom“. veñ su oni postali ispraæweni u sebi samima. åak i na strani „evharistijsko eshatoloãkih“ bogoslova. ikonama. I joã: koliko moæemo susresti Svetu Trojicu u kwigama. molitva. igumana manastira Iviron. krajwem! Izuzetak..

1998: 53. nije samo „svet“ onaj koji. takav kakav je i nijedan drugi. naravno. u ovaj naã æivot. Mada. Ãta tek reñi za pojmove: spasewe.. naã dvig ka Wemu. nerecipirani i nerazumqivi. oni ne samo da postaju neaktuelni. stvari su joã teæe sa klasiåno hriãñanskim pojmovima. oni se pretvaraju u znakove – tragove iza kojih zjapi praznina od ispraæwenosti smisla i naznaåewa. Nije dovoqno reñi samo: „Bog“ i oåekivati saglasnost svih oko ovog „termina“. darovi! Odvojeni od Spasiteqa. veñ da su sami hriãñani „ubili“ svoje sopstvene znakove sporazumevawa. veñ uvek otvoreni za „dogaœaj dolaska Drugog“ u naãu aktuelnost i savremenost. åak i oni „van Crkve“ mogu nas mnogo nauåiti tome. ili kao nacional – institucija – åuvar. . oni su danas postali autonomni i samodovoqni pamfleti kojima hriãñani neuspeãno pokuãavaju da predstave svoj identitet i 25 Papadopulos. postoji mnoãtvo religija koje se pozivaju na pravoverno tumaåewe istog. ili u najboqem sluåaju kao joã jedna grupa koja se „bavi duhovnoãñu“. jer. 26 Kao oni koji iako jednom definisani nikada nisu zacementirani. priznajemo sa æaqewem.38 Teoloãki åasopis.. Tako.biznis institucija. odnoãewa ka svetu i ka sebi samima. dakle. Neshvatawem i neæivqewem istinskog smisla koju pojmovi imaju u sebi26. Ali. usled svoje „greãnosti i sekularizovanosti“ neñe da åuje za hriãñanstvo. Tako. od Duha i od Darodavca istih. jedino isti ti hriãñani mogu ponovo oæiveti svoje pojmove i uåiniti ih razumqivim i spasavajuñim. u ovom sluåaju savremenih qudi i hriãñana. danas reå „Crkva“ veñini zvuåi ili kao druãtveno – humanitarno . naãe æivqewe. ali Koji potrebuje naã priziv. veñ postaju mrtvi! Dolazimo do uvida da. razumevawa. duhovnost. S druge strane. N° 9 neka zasebna „ontologija pojmova“25 nezavisno od liånosti i zajednice koje ih razumeju i daju im smisao i semantiåko znaåewe.

imitacija æivog æivota Crkve. Problem jezika bogosluæewa nemamo hrabrosti ni da zapoåenemo. marame i ãamije. Neaktuelnost. Naravno. ili neãto tako sliåno. „obiåajima“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 39 svoju posebnost u odnosu na druge27. a svi zajedno odvojeni od æivota. . S tim povezan i uslovqen jeste problem liturgije. maske. Ali o tome je joã davno mnogo reåeno. „praksama“. Problema koji se javqaju u obzorju smrti åoveåije i wegove prolaznosti. Imajuñi pred sobom „krizirajuñe“ bogoslovqe. bogosluæewa uopãte kao „dela naroda“. jer nam je ona najoåiglednija u aktuelnom æivotu naãe pomesne Crkve i wenih parohija. uzdasi. liturgije.od – muåewa – u – paklu“ konotaciju. Kakvu reå. Mi upuñujemo na joã ãire posmatrawe problema. to sve dotiåe i crkvenu poboænost kao izraz bogoslovqa i bogosluæewa. mrtvu stvarnost. ne moæemo prenebregnuti problem svojevrsne „poboænosti“ koja se raœa u trenucima kada neevharistijsko bogoslovqe preokupira naãu paæwu i naãe poboæne postupke. kakav æivot svetu i åoveku moæe ponuditi jedno razcrkvqeno bogoslovqe. teatralnost. bogosluæewe i poboænost su odvojeni od bogoslovqa i obrnuto. posledica su ove razdvojenosti. Kao i mrtvom bogoslovqu. pokuãavajuñi s tim da poveæemo problem bogoslovqa. tj. hiperrealno posto27 Za ovu tvrdwu namerno ne navodimo nikakvu referencu. jedna bezbogoslovska liturgija i jedna neevharistijska poboænost (s tim da su meœusobne varijante istih bezbrojne)? Laænu reå. U suãtini. gluma. tako i mrtvoj poboænosti prete iste nepogode. „spasiti se“ najåeãñe sa sobom ima druãtveno – ekonomsku ili „spasiti – se . „askezama“. bogosluæewe se pretvara u pojavu koju ovako definiãemo: sentimentalno señawe na davne dogaœaje iz æivota Hristovog. kakvu autentiånost. Ipak. tj. Za proseånog hriãñanina. „starinama“. Problemi koji se javqaju u „naåinima“ sluæewa. ili bivajuñi izvor istog. kakvu stvarnost. bezidentitetnost. naivnost. poboænosti.

b) Osvrt na ostale probleme Naravno. moæe biti govora o govoru dolazeñeg. Samo Tu. To su plodovi ove krize savremenog crkvenog æivota. ostvaruje sebe i svoj æivot kao æivot Crkve za dogaœaj neoåekivanog – smisla – i . trvewa. Evharistije. mrtvilo mrtvosti. evharistijsko bogoslovqe. zakona. umirawa. tj. bogoslovqe. Odvojeno od svog prirodnog Mesta. uãivawem u mrtve kalupe æivota. Tako i samo tako. mræwa. saborni. tj. za dogaœaj veånog æivota. Æivota koji je odvojen od „dogaœaja dolaska Drugog i Drugaåijeg“. na tom Mestu. Ko ñe nas izbaviti od smrti ove? Daqe neñemo iñi. 2004: 34. samo Tu moæe biti jezika o jeziku aktuelnosti. neshvatawa blage vesti Jevanœeqa.40 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 jawe.æivota – Donositeqa. liturgije i poboænosti jeste sam æivot Crkve. znawa. ali mrtvih eksponata. iskuãewa. evharistijska liturgija. hriãñana. sam obiåan æivot svakodnevnice Crkve. kao Mesta na kome Jedan postaje mnogi i mnogi postaju Jedan28 i Crkve kao zajednice „dolazeñeg . onih qudi i hriãñana koji odriåuñi se svakog olakog definisawa. sa svim svojim sivilom svakodnevnice tragedija. samim tim i zatvoren. „pravoslavnih etika“. samo Tu moæe biti pojmova o pojmovima istinskog. Hrista i zajednice „prizivajuñih – Drugog“ tj. preævakavawa starih floskula. za dogaœaj qubavi izmeœu Hrista i Wegove Crkve. . ali to i nije tema ovog rada. iskustveni.Drugog“tj. Æivota koji je smrt od poåetka do kraja. koje ñe imati stvarnu vezu sa naãim æivotima. liturgija i poboænost umiru i postaju samo jedni od fosila u muzejskoj zbirci interesantnih. oni postaju iznova aktuelni. 28 Zizjulas. pored reåenog. obiåaja. evharistijska poboænost. tj. itd. jeziåkih oblikovawa. mogli bismo se dotañi joã mnoãtva velikih i malih problema koji uznemiravaju savremeni crkveni æivot. æivi. pravila. Izvor takvog æivog bogoslovqa.

na æalost. Puteva kojima se oni kreñu. postaje danas ne mali problem. antagonisti s druge strane. koji je najåeãñe daleko od takvih „izmiãqenih problema“ koje utopijski bogoslovi hoñe da nametnu. Mnoge se pojave proglaãavaju pravoslavnim. posebno Novog Zaveta. krstonosnim i muånim izazovom problema koji se nalaze unutar Crkve. naroåito kod epigona jednog takvog utopizma. moæda? Mræwa? A ostalo? Jel’ to pravoslavqe? Za mnoge. laika. ovi epigoni zanemaruju probleme Crkve koji su problemi ovog – ovde svakodnevnog æivota. Problemi identiteta istih. insistirawe na krajwostima ãto mogu da nastanu iz neadekvatnog shvatawa ãta znaåe reåi „evharistijski“ i „eshatoloãki“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 41 Spomenimo samo to da crkveno i hriãñansko bogoslovqe stoji pred teãkim. mnogo je nejasno. jeste. Ipak. Poseban problem predstavqa pojava onog ãto smo napred nazvali „evharistijsko – eshatoloãki utopizam“. kao jednog od temeqa bogoslovqa i iskustva Crkve. ko to sme danas da pita? Danas kada se åini da niãta nije jasnije od toga. monaha i wihove svojevrsne teoretske i stvarne razdvojenosti. Kako prosuditi sva izvitoperewa koja se javqaju u onome ãto mi zovemo „pravoslavqe“? Pravoslavqe. da li je to pravoslavqe? A ekspanzionistiåki ãovinizam? Homofobija. Osmiãqavaju æivot svoj. . „eshatologije“. bolesti odvajawa i razdvajawa bogoslovqa – liturgije – poboænosti. koji je jedan te isti æivot Crkve. Nacionalizam. tj. ali i unutar sveta. Nama nije jasno. a pritom nemaju nikakvih suãtinskih veza sa pravoslavqem kao „iskustvom susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka“. pred nama stoje problemi klira. Zanemarivawe Svetog Pisma Crkve. „buduñnosti“. pak. Wihovi. Brinuñi se samo za „ontologije“. Relevantnosti. U stvari. izraza i izvoœewa bogosluæewa. ãta je to? Ali. a takoœe i za liturgijske sitnice oko pitawa pokreta. Takoœe. zanemarivawem onoga ãto Crkva „kao zajednica buduñnosti“ jeste. to je samo joã jedan posledica one bolesti napred formulisane. bolesti u kojoj virus „neåeæwe za Drugim Dolazeñim“ uniãtava sve.

za poåetak. 29 Potrebno je iznova. problemi. itd. koja je uvek saborna. Oåekuje. Problem katiheze. Ali.. biti dovoqno. do iznemoglosti.42 Teoloãki åasopis. Problemi. uvek zajedniåka. i to ñe. makar malo. Problem ekumenizma. Nada se. Problem Crkve i politike. otvarawe. tj. N° 9 istiåu nedostatak aktivizma. Svetlo „personalistiåke ontologije“ mitropolita Zizjulasa moæe zasvetliti. to je prevelika tema za ovaj premali prostor. borbe za mesto u druãtvu. iãåekivawe. Problemi dehumanizacije. Ali samo ako bude daqi podstrek za joã jaåe traæewe. Ostaje joã gomila problema pred kojim Crkva stoji. kao „znaka Carstva Boæijeg“. osmiãqavawe. dok Dolazeñi ne doœe. Strepi. Bioetiåki problemi i iskuãewa tehnologije i kibernetike. uvek liturgijska. veronauke u ãkolama29. osoqavawe. o opasnosti wene otrgnutosti od smisla prave crkvene katiheze. sa trezvenoãñu. promisliti mesto veronauke kao joã jednog od „predmeta“ u sistemu dræavnog obrazovawa (deduktivno – racionalistiåkog. tj. problemi. razmekãavawe. Traæi. neiskustvenog). Åeka. tj. Vapi za Onim koji jedini moæe „doneti“ problemima otvarawe. evharistijska i na-zajednicu-dolazeñegCarstva-upuñujuña. tj. . ali opet promaãujuñi istinski smisao Crkve.

The Theology of Event.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 43 BIBLIOGRAFIJA Zizjulas. Sveta Gora Atonska: Hilandar. Naã æivot u Hristu. Jaques 2004. Zagreb: Krãñanska misao. Papadopulos. Teologija i jezik. Raspeti Bog. Rijeka: Ex Libris. Lestviånik. Beograd: Hriãñanska misao. Mario 2008. Derrida. Joseph 1984. Ratzinger. Izazovi post – metafizike. The Weakness of God . Kopiñ. Chicago: Indiana University Press. Aleksandar 2008. John 2008. Jurgen 2008. Beograd: Obraz svetaåki. Stilijan 1998. Uvod u krãñanstvo. Evharistija i Carstvo Boæije. Novi Sad: Beseda. Ãmeman. Moltmann. Jovan 2004. Sremski Karlovci: Kwiæarnica Zorana Stojanoviña. Hristov æivot u nama. Sarajevo: Ãahin – Paãiñ. Pisanje i razlika. Caputo. Jovan 1998. .

Sveti Duh. kolebqivu ali veoma vaænu ulogu u prenoãewu Predawa.02. ikona. ovaj praznik je posebno vaæan jer Sveti Duh silazi na svakog ålana Crkve.36 Fakultet za kulturu i medije.edu. . S obzirom na to da je kroz istoriju hriãñanstva slika imala. Primljeno: 21.2010 Megatrend univerzitet Prihvañeno: 18. opisan je na ikonama praznika Pedesetnica. perspektive). wihovom poreklu i wihovoj ulozi u prenoãewu nevidqivog sveta materijalnim sredstvima izraæavawa na ikoni Pedesetnica. koji se javqa kroz delovawe Svetog Duha.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 45 dr Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoqiñ UDK 291. Takoœe. 11 070 Novi Beograd Originalni nauåni rad vcvetkovska-ocokoljic@megatrend. geometrije.01. kroz pisane i slikane izvore. simbolizam.rs Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: pisani i slikani izvori Rezime U ovom radu ñe se govoriti o simbolici hriãñanskog praznika Pedesetnica. i svakome daje posebne darove. Taj naroåiti dar. Naroåito je vaæan dogaœaj u kome apostoli govore razliåitim jezicima i razumeju se meœusobno. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole i obnavqa jedinstvo Boga i qudi kroz duhovnu izgradwu Crkve. Na dan Pedesetnice. Kquåne reåi: Pedesetnica. u ovom radu je naglasak na istraæivawu simbolizma pojedinaånih likovnih elemenata (boje. ponaosob.2010 Goce Delåeva 8.

opipqivim sredstvima izraæavawa vekovima je bila u sluæbi religije. kada su stvoreni uslovi za wen pun æivot.46 Teoloãki åasopis. a sledeñi dan (Duhovski ponedeqak) je posveñen Svetom Duhu. Åovekova potreba da nevidqivo predstavi materijalnim. Sveti Duh je izlio svoje brojne darove na prisutne i omoguñio poåetak stvarawa zemaqske Crkve po uzoru na nebesku. koje izraæavaju razliåita znaåewa 1 Jovanoviñ. . Uloga ikone – kao religijske slike bila je kolebqiva u hriãñanskoj istoriji. Trojice i Trojiåin dan. meœutim wen opstanak govori o tome da posredstvom we. Ikona Pedesetnice stoga ima podjednaku vaænost ali i dodatnu vrednost jer se na dan Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispunilo obeñawe Hrista. 2005: 387. N° 9 Uvod Savremeno druãtvo ispuweno je brojnim slikama. Ovim praznikom proslavqa se „zavrãni åin osnivawa Hristove Crkve na zemqi. oboæewe apostola i poåetak duhovnog puta. propovedaju i åine åuda“1. Poreklo praznika pedesetnica Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole spada u Velike praznike a poznat je pod imenima: Duhovi. Æeqa åoveka da dosegne duhovne visine i danas je podjednako aktuelna a civilizacijski razvoj nije uspeo da zadovoqi wegov unutraãwi svet. Prema reåima Uspenskog s obzirom na to da se u pravoslavnoj Crkvi praznik Svete Trojice slavi na prvi dan Pedesetnice (u nedequ) i da se na taj dan kroz bogosluæewe izraæava dogmatsko uåewe o Svetoj Trojici. åovek moæe sozercati nevidqivog Boga i ugledati se na svetiteqe i muåenike. a dvanaestorica apostola udostojeni da svedoåe o Hristu. te je stoga odreœeno kao civilizacija slike. ove dve ikone.

u trostrukom obliåju: „u Tvorcu i Gospodu istorije spasewa. Vernici doæivqavaju Boæiju stvarnost kao i prvi hriãñani. u skladu sa reåima svetog Jovana Preteåe (Mat. u znak zahvalnosti prema Bogu. ovaj praznik je imao i drugo znaåewe. uzviãenom u Boga i u Svetom Duhu koji se razliåitim darovima Duha moñno pojavqivao meœu wima“4. kada je Mojsije primio Zakon na Sinaju. kao señawe na unutraãwe jedinstvo. „Kada je wegovo poslawe okonåano. On je proslavqan i kao zahvalnost za prve plodove na zemqi. i praznik berbe na svrãetku svake godine. Sin se vratio Ocu.16). Loski. dok Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole otkriva promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta3. pedeset dana nakon Hristovog vaskrsewa i deset dana nakon wegovog vaznesewa. kad sabereã trud svoj sa wive“ (2 Moj. stvarawe saveza izmeœu Boga i izabranog naroda. Isto.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 47 i smisao. Slavqen po isteku sedam nedeqa. 2006: 520. O danu odmora. buduñi da ga ãaqe Otac i da ga predaje Sin5. Tako se kroz ikonu Svete Trojice daje nagoveãtaj tajnovitosti Boæanskog postojawa. Silazak Svetog Duha predstavqa drugo delovawe Oca jer Otac najpre ãaqe Sina a zatim i Svetog Duha. Poreklo praznika Pedesetnica potiåe iz Starog Zaveta. Evdokimov: 2009: 230. na pedeseti dan posle Pashe. 3. u krãtewu Crkve ogwem i Svetim Duhom. Praznik 2 3 4 5 6 Uspenski. 23. buduñu æetvu i kao dan (dar) Gospoda: „I praznik æetve prvina od truda tvojega ãto posijeã u poqu svojem. 2003: 120.11). u vaskrslom Gospodu Isusu Hristu. . Poseban znaåaj ova dva praznika objediwuje se u vidqivom silasku Svetog Duha na apostole. 2008: 208. Tako Sveti Duh ispuwava opãtu voqu tri Lica. a Sveti Duh je siãao kao Liånost“6. Loski 2008: 202. Benc. odgovaraju prazniku Pedesetnica2.

Evdokimov: 2009: 232. Æivot Crkve. Isto. „Tako blagodat zakona data Svetim Duhom preuzima mesto zakona sa Sinaja“7. ili u æivom meœusobnom zajedniåarewu. zapravo posledica Ovaploñewa. Posebna vrednost ikone Pedesetnica je u tome ãto „izraæava najpotpuniju dogmu praznika povezanog sa osnovnom dogmom hriãñanstva – Trojedinim Bogom. åine apostoli koji sede polukruæno postavqeni i plameni jezici koji sa neba silaze na wihove glave: „I pokazaãe im se razdijeqeni jezici kao ogweni. jer je tvorevina postala sposobna da primi Sveti Duh. kroz silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. 2003: 122. na wihovo propo7 8 9 10 Uspenski. 2008: 209. N° 9 Nedeqa se kao señawe na dan otkrivewa zakona uobliåio kao duhovni i materijalni dar od Boga: „I na dan prvina kad prinosite nov dar Gospodu poslije svojih nedeqa.48 Teoloãki åasopis. Apostoli su predstavqeni potpuno smireno. dræeñi svitke ili kwige u rukama.26). koja je izdvojena prirodom i mnoãtvom liånosti. 28.3). da imate sabor sveti. sledi Liturgiju i stvara jednu ogromnu perspektivu koja prevazilazi okvire istorijskog fragmenta da bi izrazila ‘unutraãwu reå’ dogaœaja“ 10. i siœe po jedan na svakoga od wih“ (Dap. kako se uobiåajeno prikazuje. povezan je suãtinski s ovim uåewem. nijednoga posla ropskoga ne radite“ (4 Moj. . i time je ostvaren konaåni ciq Boæanstvenog domostroja na zemqi9. Osnovne kompozicione elemente ikone Pedesetnica. U skladu sa starozavetnim savezom koji je naåinio Bog izmeœu sebe i qudi. Tako je Pedesetnica. Loski. Loski 2008: 202. Ikona Pedesetnice „objediwuje sve tekstove Svetog Pisma. 2. jer je Trojiånost. naåelo u skladu sa kojim Crkva æivi i gradi Boæije kraqevstvo na zemqi“8. Kwige i svitci ukazuju na buduñu misiju apostola. javqa se novozavetni Savez.

Takoœe. veka (Manafis at al. Princeton University Press.59). Na woj su prikazane åetiri scene u tri reda: Na vrhu ikone prikazana je scena Roœewe Isusa Hrista a odmah pored we. . Rani prikazi praznika pedesetnica Najstarija poznata ikona na kojoj se pojavquje silazak Svetog Duha na apostole – Pedesetnica (Penthkosth) potiåe iz 7. Vremenom ñe se ustaliti izobraæavawe najpre praznog. U tom srediãwem delu je ponekad prikazana Bogorodica (kao simvol Crkve). na Tajnoj veåeri uspostavqena Evharistija – hleb i vino). 1990: 98). veka11 i nalazi se u manastiru Sveta Katarina. Weitzmann. izbor najvaænijih 11 Ozoqin ikonu datira u 7. Vidi u Weitzmann.4). kao nevidqivo prisustvo Hrista – Glave Crkve. ?. Ova ikona predstavqa jednu od najstarijih grupnih ikona koja pokazuje izdvojene teme. Vajcman ovu ikonu datira u 10. u istom nivou scena Predstavqawe u hramu. (1976: 73-76). u sredini je scena Vaznesewa a u dowem delu. slika 7. tamnog. gde jarko crveni zraci koji se spuãtaju na apostole. 140. Naroåito interesantan je srediãwi deo ikone. izviru iz kruæne mandorle (medaqona) u kojoj je Hristos. veka ili poåetak 10. ali je najåeãñe prostor ostavqen prazan. koji su bili prisutni u trenutku ovog velikog dogaœaja (Dap 2. prikaz starca-kraqa (kosmos) a povremeno i qudskih figura koje simbolizuju predstavnike razliåitih naroda. u dve grupe. a potom unutar tog prostora. ikona je datirana u drugu polovinu 9. koji sede u gornici (koja simvolizuje nastavak propovedi jer je u gornici. na Sinaju. koji deli apostole. 2. vek. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 49 vedawe a gestikulacija i razgovor ukazuju na silazak Svetog Duha „i ispuniãe se svi Duha Svetoga i stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima“ (Dap. u monografiji Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. str. vek. polukruænog prostora ispod apostola. prikazana je scena Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. K.

simetriju i druge uobiåajene elemente putem kojih opisani dogaœaj otkriva sveto projavqivawe i slavu12. koja ñe se ubrzo uobliåiti u prikaz Pedesetnice. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. Sveti Duh u obliku goluba se pojavquje prethodno na krãtewu Isusa Hrista. Jer i Pasha naãa Hristos. jer sva kasnija izobraæewa. 2009: 230. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole u skladu sa obeñawem Spasiteqa: „A Utjeãiteq Duh Sveti. 1990. nalazi jedva primetan golub naslikan s lica (iscrtan na zlatnoj pozadini). veñ kao tajna izbavqewa jer u pedeseti dan posle vaskrsewa Hrista. Tako se ona ne smatra samo kao posledwi dan pashalnog perioda. prinoseñi åoveka kao dar Bogu. u pedeseti dan – znaåi veñ krajem 4. 98-99. posredstvom Svetog Duha. Ozoqin celokupnu ikonografiju naziva starohriãñanskom. u pokretu ogwenih jezika Otac. da bude novo tijesto. potiåu iz perioda nakon ikonoborstva.50 Teoloãki åasopis. koji su predstavqeni u sedeñem poloæaju. ærtvova se za nas“ (1 Kor. kao ãto ste beskvasni. 2007: 28. Meœutim. tako se i na dan Pedesetnice. veka“14. . N° 9 kompozicionih elemenata. dakle. Interesantno je primetiti da se u sredini. stari kvasac. Ozoqin. u åetrdeseti dan posle Vaskrsa i Silaska Svetog Duha. u skladu sa Prvom poslanicom Korinñanima „Odbacite. koga ñe otac poslati u ime 12 13 14 Manafis.7). Evdokimov. nadnosi nad qude i usinovquje ih. izmeœu apostola. wegov istraæivaåki rad ukazuje na to da je prvobitna ikonografija praznika Pedesetnica bila povezana sa praznikom Vaznesewe i da su pre wegovog „osamostaqewa“ rani hriãñani praznovali „osmi dan“ (Gospodwi dan) a „Dan pashe“ je slavqen kao tajna ærtve. Ipak. a opravdawe na sceni Pedesetnica (gde ñe se i kasnije pojavqivati povremeno) moæe se pronañi u reåima Evdokimova13 da kao ãto se Sveti Duh na dan krãtewa Gospodweg nadnosi nad qudsku prirodu Hristovu i usinovquje je. 5. a wena ikonografija se mewa „odvajawem praznika Vaznesewa.

veka (Bobbio. moguñe predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha u obliku plamenih zraka. anœelima. Vidi: Slika 8 (Ozoqin. noãen. . Sa desne strane Bogorodice nalazi se sveti Jovan Krstiteq u stavu propovedawa. 18 19 Vidi: Ozoqin. Na woj pronalazimo. nedeqa saæima unutar sebe u jedan dan „tajinsko znaåewe pedeset dana“15. Jedno od utemeqewa wenog prisustva na ovoj sceni pronalazimo u pomenu zajedniåke molitve: „Ovi svi bijahu istrajno i jednoduãno na molitvi i moqewu. 2016) u sceni Vaznesewe. 2007: 32-36. 16 Vidi: Slika 3 (Ozoqin. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. koji nose upaqene bakqe“. postavqena je „zvezda prañena personifikacijama sunca i meseca. veka (Monza. Gorwi deo scene prati iste elemente 15 Isto. br. 10). Iznad wene glave. likovi imaju dubqe. br. On ñe vas nauåiti svemu i podsjetiñe vas na sve ãto vam rekoh“ (Jovan 14. Meœutim. prañen anœelom. 17 S obzirom na to da na ikoni ne postoji hronoloãko vreme. Hrista na prestolu sa kwigom u ruci. sa pretpostavkom da se odnose na ogwene jezike silaska Svetog Duha18. koji blagosiqa. Sliåna predstava Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje se i na ampuli iz 10. sa æenama i sa Marijom materom Isusovom i sa brañom wegovom“ (Dap. Na levu i desnu grupu od Bogorodice. 1019). „Posledwi dan pedesetnice.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 51 moje. Ovu scenu Ozoqin naziva Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica (2007: 40). takoœe prañen anœelom: „I dok netremice gledahu za wim kako ide na nebo. gle. pronalazi se joã na ampuli iz 6. 1. u mandorli. U dowem delu nalazi se Bogorodica Oranta. 2007: 33). 1.14). 2007: 39. a sa leve strane je starozavetni sveãtenik sa kadionicom u ruci17. spuãta se po pet zraka iz Hristove mandorle. simboliåko znaåewe u odnosu na realno prisustvo u trenutku nekog dogaœaja. dva åovjeka u haqinama bijelim stadoãe pored wih“ (Dap.26). u gorwem delu. 2007: 46).

godiãwe. okruæena apostolima. usmereni ka apostolima. prati isti kompozicioni obrazac kao ampula sa svetim Minom (Templ. Ispod mandorle sa Hristom. veka pomiwe se da je postojala grnåarska radionica koja je proizvodila 15 000 kråaga za vino. dakle. i da su predstavqale neãto nalik danaãwem industrijskom. veli Gospod“ (Is. to je postalo sve. 66. .9). Vidi: Skalova. 2009: 126). 2005: 374). dubqa simbolika pronalazi se u bliskoj vezi izmeœu ova dva dogaœaja jer Hristos obeñava Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole („nego ñete primiti silu kada siœe Sveti Duh“ Dap. veka (Jovanoviñ.8) neposredno pre Vaznesewa („I ovo rekavãi dok oni netremice gledahu. Ozoqin21 smatra da je ovo prvo (poznato) predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole i da je usled nepostojawa posebne ikonografije vezane za ovaj dogaœaj. scena prikquåena Vaznesewu. 20 Likovni simvol boæanskog delovawa i spasewa. vek) na kome je prikazan Danilo sa lavovima. poznat u antici i judaistiåkom slikarstvu. podiæe se i uze ga oblak ispred oåiju wihovih“. veñ da su se proizvodile u velikoj koliåini. sa dve kamile koje kleåe. 1. 21 22 Vidi: Ozoqin. 2007: 45-47. Gabra (2001. „jer je sve to ruka moja stvorila. nalazi se otvorena (desnica20) ruka Gospodwa jer „Desnicom. a u hriãñanskom slikarstvu se javqa od 4. Tako one nisu bile usamqeni proizvodi ranih hriãñanskih umetnika veñ tipski. U jednom egipatskom papirusu iz 3. N° 9 predstavqawa dok je na dowem delu prikazana Bogorodica Oranta. po tipskom obrascu srebrnih ploåica. Grnåarija je bila jeftina i masovno se proizvodila. Brojne ampule (ili åuturice) bile su åesto ukraãavane scenom svetog Mine u molitvi. dræaå za lampu od terakote (3. koja je ispustila goluba – Svetog Duha a sa obe wene strane izviru kratki svetlosni zraci iz mandorle. 2. Dap. Takoœe.2). 23).33). 1. Boæijom vaznese se“ (Dap. namewenog za prodaju hodoåasnicima.52 Teoloãki åasopis. serijskom proizvodu. slika 20. Takoœe se smatra da ampule22 nisu bile unikatan proizvod. Meœutim.

Detaqnije (Ozoqin. ikona ili fresaka. odmah iznad glava apostola. 2007: 60-65). Loski 2008: 209. veka24. . i iz åijeg kquna izlazi pomenuti plamen.47). kao znak prosvetqewa osnovnog åelovoœe tela i sadræanih misli (. Tako se scena Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje u dva sirijska rukopisa (14-16. Postavqawe plamenih jezika na oreole. Jovanoviñ. zadræava srediãwe mesto u predstavi „a Gospod svaki dan dodavaãe Crkvi one koji se spasavahu“ (Dap.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 53 utvrœeni obrasci izobraæavawa scena i svetiteqa. Vidi: Slika 12 (Ozoqin. prema reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova ukazuje na to da je Sveti Duh siãao u obliku jezika „koji su spuãteni na glave apostola. okruæena apostolima na åijim oreolima se nalaze plameni jeziåci a iznad wih je tamni svod koji se nalazi iznad celokupne grupe. 24 Rukopis se nalazi u Lavrentinskoj biblioteci u Firenci. vek) sa novinom uvoœewa elementa enterijera koji ukazuje na odvijawe dogaœaja u zatvorenom prostoru. 25 26 Uspenski. to jest gornicu. Vremenom ñe se scene Vaznesewe i Pedesetnica razdvojiti23 ali ñe Bogorodica joã dugo åiniti sastavni deo brojnih ikona Pedesetnice. to jest u gornici..) pokazujuñi da Sveti Duh prebiva u svetima“25. Moæe se 23 Pojedinaåni sluåajevi ovakvih scena javqañe se povremeno i kasnije. 2007: 53). u kojoj su apostoli bili okupqeni u trenutku silaska Svetog Duha26. Vremenom ñe se luåni (arhitektonski) svod izobraæavati kao aluzija na mesto dogaœaja. Tako se ona pojavquje u saåuvanom rukopisu (Jevanœeqe iz Ravule) krajem 6. Na oreolu Bogorodice (koji je jedini pozlañen) je takoœe plameni jezik ali je on povezan sa golubom koji se nalazi iznad we i spuãta se iz nebeskog svoda.. moæe svedoåiti sledeña opisana iluminacija. 2. U prilog tome da su one najverovatnije bile replike scena sa iluminiranih rukopisa. Bogorodica kao majka Crkve. 2005: 388. Bogorodica je prikazana u sredini.

simvol Sina. 2007: 74. Ovaj prikaz prisutan je u antici a joã ranije u scenama drevnog Egipta kao simbol prisustva nevidqivog Boga. iz 7. i jedan golub na Kwizi. tron. dok ñe se uporedo sa wim razviti polukruæni prostor ispod apostola sa simvolizacijom mraka . a ipak razliåite“28. kao i brojni drugi kompozicijski elementi i simvoli. odnosno konaåno ispuwewe obeñawa. simvol Svetog Duha“27. simvol Oca.neznaboæaåkog sveta. koji ostaje iza wih. pojava praznog prostora moæe se pratiti joã od burnog ikonoboraåkog perioda 9. U sredini. veka. otvorena kwiga Jevanœeqa. izmeœu apostola. odreœen praznim tronom (ugotovqenim prestolom). Obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (bez prisustva Bogorodice ali sa prikazom zlatnog goluba) koji primaju Sveti Duh. Prema reåima Uspenskog 27 28 Ozoqin. Tako je opisana simboliåka predstava neopisive Svete Trojice. Silazak Svetog Duha koji proishodi iz Oca i izliva se kroz Boga Sina (Dap. veka. ñe se vremenom ustaliti. simvolizujuñi prikaz uzlaznog puta na ikoni. a koji se prvi put pojavquje joã na pomenutoj ikoni. Loski. . Takoœe. 2008: 202. ni ugotovqeni presto. jednosuãtne i nerazdeqive. 2.54 Teoloãki åasopis. unutar trodelne kompozicije. „Svi apostoli gledaju ka sredini gde se nalazi simboliåka predstava Svete Trojice.33) otkriva svetu blagodarnost bogopoznawa tajanstva Svete Trojice. Tako dolazi do ispuwewa otkrivewa jednog Boga u tri Ipostasi. Uspenski. nalazi se prazan prostor. prazna stolica nije izvorno hriãñanskog porekla. N° 9 pretpostaviti da je nebeski svod predstavqen iseåkom iznad Bogorodice i apostola preteåa uspostavqawa polukruænog prostora koji ñe se kasnije javiti. iznad apostola. na iluminacijama iz Hludovskog Psaltira. Meœutim. u manastiru Sveta Katarina. Ova scena u skladu je sa reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova da je na dan silaska Svetog Duha na apostole projavqeno konaåno delovawe Treñe liånosti Svete Trojice kao sile osveñewa.

2000: 50. Hristos nije vidqivo prisutan ali je On „Glava koja je uvek prisutna“31. 6. Moñ propovedawa (kao jedan od darova) se sa Hrista (bogoåoveka). dakle u gornici. najåeãñe u æivoj gestikulaciji dok se na wihove oreole iz nebeskog svoda spuãtaju zraci Duha Svetog. Od 12. Apostoli su prikazani. 3. 2. 2009: 232. 20.2). Evdokimov. Qudi na sceni simvolizuju „qude poboæne iz svakog naroda koji je pod nebom“ (Dap. U wemu se javqaju dva prikaza: qudi i/ili kraq.13. kroz silazak Svetog Duha. Tako se uspostavqa obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (Lk.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 55 hriãñanstvo je u mnogoboæaåkom svetu izabralo sve ono ãto je wegovo i nazvalo ga „hriãñanstvom pre Hrista“ 29. odnosno Hristom“30. izvija se i wen dowi deo obrazujuñi polukruæni tamni prostor. postavqenih u polukrugu. i primaju Sveti Duh. . 5) jer Gospod kaæe: „Sabrañu sve narode“ (Joil. Tako su „dvanaest apostola koji obrazuju jedan konaåan oblik (polukrug) predivan izraz jedinstva tela Crkve sa raznovrsnoãñu wenih ålanova“ a wihovo grupisawe je dovrãeno prazninom – nepopuwenim mestom – mestom nevidqive glave Crkve. Otkr. prenosi na åoveka (apostole). veka sve åeãñe se javqaju ikone Pedesetnice bez prisustva Bogorodice. Uporedo sa izvijawem polukruæne klupe na kojoj sede apostoli. stihira glasa 2) obrañajuñi se stareãinama naroda tako su se i apostoli okupili u nedoumici oko naåina propovedawa i iãåekivawu da postanu dostojni da ãire Hristovu nauku. Tako i uputstvo za izobraæavawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole (poznatom i kao Duhovi) u Kwizi popa 29 30 31 Uspenski. Ova scena kompozicijski veoma podseña na ikonu Poduåavawe u hramu. åija tela åine Crkvu. Loski. 2008: 208. Oni se nalaze unutar enterijera. Uspenski.14) kao dvanaest plemena Izraiqa. Kao ãto „iziœe Isus i uåaãe“ (veliko veåerwe. Na wenom mestu postavqen je prazan prostor koji odvaja dve grupe apostola.

2002: 615-616. Najraniji poznati prevod Erminije Dionisija iz Furne na slovenski jezik. . Luka se tako nazva prvi zograf na zemqi“36..56 Teoloãki åasopis. Tu uze sveti Luka i naslika åetiri ikone gledajuñi na lice Bogorodice. Novogradska ikona pedesetnice – silazak svetog duha na apostole Uloga ikone je da propoveda podjednako kao i reå. i nad domom. U priruåniku za ikonopisce pod nazivom Erminija porodice Zografski34 (1728) pronalazimo sledeñe uputstvo za slikawe scene Silazak Svetog Duha: „Dom i dvanaestorica apostola sede u polukrugu. Mediñ. Kada prostreãe i proåitaãe. Mediñ. i oko wega jako svetlo a dvanaest ogwenih jezika izlazi od wega i spuãta se na svakog pojedinog od tih apostola“35. Glas sa nebesa prestade. I utvrdiãe ga u Veliki Åetvrtak. Sveti 32 33 34 35 36 Poznatoj i pod nazivom Drugi jerusalimski rukopis. gore. na glavi ima krunu i nad wim ova slova (KOZMOS?) a slavenski (M?R?). Jovanoviñ. tada prinese svako svoje napisano. Prema apokifnom jevanœequ ikona (slikana rukom åoveka) je nastala neposredno posle Jevanœeqa: „ (. Sveti Duh kao golub. 2002: 319.) I tu uzeãe hartiju i pisahu. N° 9 Danila32 (1674) sadræi tekst prema Isaiji: „Gospod ovo kaæe: Uzeñu vas iz svih naroda i okupiti vas iz svih plemena“33. 2005: 367. I sastaviãe sveto Jevanœeqe.. i ispod wih mala prostorija. i u woj star åovek dræi pred sobom ubrus obema rukama. i na ubrusu dvanaest svitaka. sluãajuñi glas sa nebesa.

svaki detaq.1). Kompozicija. veka (Rusija). Na ikoni kao i na fresci. 2. ka sopstvenom svetu. 28-29). boja. bezvremenu ravan. celina i celokupna scena imaju svoj naroåit. Iznad. iz razliåitih uglova) ikona o kojoj se ovde govori uspela je da saåuva vezu sa predawem u svom najåistijem duhovnom smislu. Na ikoni su prikazani apostoli koji sede na polukruæno postavqenoj klupi (eksedri). Telo Crkve i sklad sabornosti prikazan na ovoj ikoni izobraæavañe se vremenom na svim prikazima vaseqenskih sabora. uvodeñi posmatraåa u drugu. postepeno se okreñe ka unutra. U povijenom luku ispod wih. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. u zatvorenoj prostoriji (gornici). i 14. . u mraku. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. iz profila. postavqen je kraq u crvenoj odeædi i sa belim ubrusom na kome se nalazi dvanaest svitaka. iz kojeg se spuãta dvanaest ogwenih zraka ili vatrenih jezika (ovde prikazanih u tamno plavoj boji) na apostole. 2000: 161. Joil. Tako se Sveti Duh izliva na apostole ali i na sve prisutne „jednoduãno“ (Dap. 2. perspektiva. 2.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 57 Grigorije Palama kaæe da „åovek ne moæe videti Boga drugaåije osim posredstvom simvola i telesnih praobraza“37. Iako se veñ od 13. na vrhu scene prikazan je u polukrugu nebeski svod. vidqivim i prepoznatqivim sredstvima komunikacije. boæanskog sveta materijalnim. 17. Ona simvolizuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu. Ikona Pedesetnica – Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole pripada Novgorodskoj ãkoli iz 15. eshatoloãki smisao. Stoga su na ikoni prisutni svi apostoli. veka pojavquje manirizam u ikonopisu. kao znak krãtewa Duhom i vatrom jer po reåima Joila Gospod kaæe: „Izliñu od Duha mojega na svako tijelo“ (Dap. Stav koji je dominirao na ikoni ranijih vekova zamewuje se gestikulacijom. uvoœewem dimenzije stvarnog prostora i vremena (prikazivawe s leœa. duhovnu 37 Uspenski. a wen odnos koji je uvek bio „spoqa“ prema onome koji se moli.

Oni sede na sitronu (antiåki obiåaj sedewa na polukruænoj klupi po vaænosti) a prvi meœu jednakima su apostol Petar i Pavle39. prikazivana je u dnu ikone (viãe 38 38 Evdokimov. kraj 9. nasuprot pometwi jezika u Vavilonu. a kada je delio ogwene jezike. 2007: 6). Svaki apostol je u posebnom i drugaåijem stavu i poloæaju od ostalih u skladu sa primawem raznovrsnih darova (1 Kor. Na ranijim prikazima. 2. sve je pozvao u jedinstvo da sloæno slavimo Najsvetijeg Duha“ (Pedesetnica. 12. Pariz. Tako ñe se åudo izlivawa Svetog Duha u vidu dara jezika vremenom u crkvama podraæavati na sluæbi kroz pojavu poznatu kao glasolalija. oni åine celinu sa jedinstvenim skladom i ritmom. mnogoqudnost40 koja se pomiwe u Delima apostolskim. celina koju obrazuju ukazuje na wihovo meœusobno razumevawe. 510.4). 40 Jedan od upeåatqivih primera prikazivawa mnogoqudnosti je iluminirani prikaz Pedesetnice u Besedama svetog Grigorija Bogoslova (Nacionalna biblioteka. Apostoli su izobraæeni u odeñi filosofa – uåiteqa. Tako se potvrœuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu jer „razliåiti su darovi ali je Duh isti“ (1 Kor. Vidi: Ocokoqiñ. koje se na svim ikonama Pedesetnice pojavquje (Ozoqin. Okrenuti jedni prema drugima oni izgledaju kao da razgovaraju. Meœutim. veka prema Ozoqinu. ova ikona je dodatno neobiåna jer predstavqa jedinu poznatu ikonu na kojoj nema praznog prostora izmeœu apostola. objavquje wihovo harmoniåno zajedniãtvo.13). jer su pojedini qudi koji su ih posmatrali govorili „nakitili su se“ ili „napili su se slatkog vina“ (Dap.58 Teoloãki åasopis.10). . 2. upravo prema reåima kondaka: „Kada je Gospod siãavãi pomeãao jezike. Bogosluæewe na dan Silaska Svetog Duha. Wihova gestikulacija ispuwena je smirewem i skladnim poretkom. jer „stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima. kondak glasa 8). folio 301). delio je narode. N° 9 zajednicu u kojoj liånost uzrasta38. 8. 2009: 232. 2004: 75. Zajedno. kao ãto im Duh davaãe da kazuju“ (Dap.4). Paris Graec.

apostolsku misiju Crkve i obeñawe spasewa“ 43. Meœutim. 17. i on. jer bi oblici bez svetlosti bili nevidqivi. blagodat a dvanaest svitaka koje sa poãtovawem dræi na pokrovu. to jest svetlosti jer „zasja se lice wegovo kao svijetlost“ i haqine wegove „postadoãe bijele kao sneg“ (Mat. simvolizuje propoved dvanaest apostola. a on sam je Kosmos – „priroda koju je zarobio knez ovoga sveta“. Iznad wegove glave najåeãñe stoje inskripcije Kosmos. wegova crvena odora simvolizuje ærtvovawe œavolove krvi.46). Meœutim. da svako ko vjeruje u mene ne ostane u tami“ (Jov. Loski 2008: 209.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 59 qudskih figura) ali ñe vremenom biti zamewena simvoliånim prikazom kraqa kao personifikacije åoveka ili qudi. Evdokimov o ovoj neobiånoj liånosti govori kao o zarobqeniku koji je okruæen sveopãtim paklom u kome se nalazi nekrãteni svet. koji vlada u svetu i belo platno u wegovim rukama sa dvanaest svitaka oznaåava dvanaest apostola. Na ikoni dominiraju zlatne povrãine. Evdokimov. Joã od antike prirodna svetlost se istiåe kao uslov vidqive lepote. primetno je poistoveñivawe zlata i bele boje. on „pruæa ruke kako bi primio. on je pognut godinama. Svet ili Knez Mira41. koji su doneli svetlost åitavom svetu svojim pouåavawem“42. Stoga se tama u kojoj æive neverni moæe protumaåiti kroz reåi Gospoda: „Ja u svijet doœoh kao svjetlost. Starac obitava „u tamnom prostoru jer je ceo svet ranije bio bez vere. svetlost o kojoj se ovde govori nije prirodna veñ Boæanska svetlost pred kojom se svetlost sunca zamraåuje. u pisanim izvorima. uloga zlata je dubqa jer sve boje potpadaju pod zakon prirodne svetlosti a na nebesima je Boæanska svetlost koja sve proæima. dakle u zatvorenoj 41 42 43 Ocokoqiñ. Uspenski. . Meœutim. uopãte. Meœutim. kraqevska kruna simvolizuje greh. 12. 2-5). jer ga greh Adama åini starcem. on govori o tome kako starac i sam æeli da se prosvetli. 2004: 75. S obzirom na to da su apostoli u gornici. 2009: 233.

tmina na prozorima simvolizuje zamraåenu prirodnu svetlost usled projavqivawa Svetog Duha. Isto. oni isijavaju svetlost tako da na wima nema senki.60 Teoloãki åasopis. Neproporcionalnost apostola u odnosu na graœevinu potvrœuje ovo odreœewe. 44 45 46 Templ. „Unutraãwi ili duhovni svet je jedino stvarno mesto u nama u kome duhovni dogaœaji ne podleæu zakonima vremena i trodimenzionalnog prostora“44. Ikona prati naåelo obrnute perspektive u skladu sa postavqawem likova po tematskom znaåaju. dakle prati uzlaznu liniju åoveka u sozercawu „trojiåne energije usredsreœene u Svetom Duhu“45. Graœevina na ikoni predstavqa zatvarawe od spoqaãweg (pojavnog) sveta i otvarawe ka duhovnom svetu unutar åoveka. Sa druge strane. 2009: 148. „Kontrast izmeœu ova dva sapostojeña sveta veoma je oãtar. preovladavaju nad ostalim apostolima. Tako apostoli Petar i Pavle. . Kompozicija ikone graœena je tako da se otvara prema nebu. prvi meœu jednakima. 2009: 328. podjednako primajuñi Svetog Duha. 2009: 328. Evdokimov. kao jedno telo Crkve oni duhovno uzrastaju u Hristu i uspiwu se u sozercawu Boga. Istovremeno sa uspiwawem deãava se i silazak u tamu. Postavqawem dva apostola na vrhu uspostavqena je zakonitost obrnute perspektive i izjednaåena vaænost apostola (prvi meœu jednakima). apostoli su izvor svetlosti koja se izlila na wih. N° 9 prostoriji. Na ikoni je arhitektura (koja uvek ima ulogu da prikaæe da se dogaœaj odvija u zasebnom prostoru) osobena i po tome ãto istovremeno vidimo i spoqaãwe i unutraãwe vidove kuñe. Energije Svetog Duha dejstvuju u ciqu osloboœewa i preobraæewa zarobqenog kosmosa“46. Svi zajedno. Na taj naåin je ikonopisac uspeo da izbegne zamku iluzije prostora i obmane qudskog oka. gore je veñ „nova zemqa“ vizija idealnog Kosmosa obasjana boæanstvenim ogwem. ka kojoj teæi stari kraq. svojom veliåinom.

vek) åiji dijagram objaãwava naåin na koji se zraci sunca spuãtaju na zemqu. 2007: 142. gde su simvolizovali oæivqavajuñu svetlost sunca. boga ili cara. 2007: 141. uzdignutog na nivo boæanstva – boga Atona. i spuãtaju na zemqu (tj. Novgorodska ikona Pedesetnice strukturno je organizovana tako da podseña na stenu sa peñinom. 2009: 140. zraci svetlosti se pojavquju i u drugim kulturama. Isto. 2009: 114. Na osnovu ove sheme Templ (2009) je uspostavio pojam „vaseqenske topografije“ koja se javqa na svim ikonama. gde izviru iz kruænog oblika sunca. vode poreklo joã iz drevnog Egipta.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 61 Zraci koji se pojavquju. Templ. Na 47 48 49 50 Ozoqin. u wegovo srediãte“47. Ajnalov (1901) je prvi izneo pretpostavku o sliånosti wegovog izobraæewa sa vizantijskom pedesetnicom48. Meœutim. Sunce je personifikovano na antiåki naåin. qude). „Drevni Istok je kosmos predstavqao u obliku kruga ili klipeusa i stavqao „Kosmokratora“. U skladu sa Plotinovim uåewem „celokupna vaseqena moæe biti uspostavqena kao oktava ili osmostepena lestvica do Boga ili Apsolutnog biña sa Vaseqenskom Tamom ili nivoom Apsolutnog Nebiña“50. . Prema wegovim reåima „peñina naglaãava najniæe mesto u vaseqeni“ ali i „svetlost i tama ili najviãe i najniæe povezani su sa naåelima Boæanskog zraka (ogwa)“49. Na wegovom dijagramu spuãta se deset sunåevih zraka koji obasjavaju zemqu. na osnovu Indikoplestusove topografije. U hriãñanskom kontekstu sunåevi zraci se pronalaze joã u Hriãñanskoj topografiji Kosme Indikoplesta (6. U skladu sa opisanom simbolikom ona prati obrazac koji je uspostavio Templ (2009). u odnosu na jaåinu svetlosti (krañi i duæi zraci). Isto. i moæe se tumaåiti i sa tog simboliåkog nivoa. kao medaqon unutar kojeg je poprsje mladiña.

Na ikoni su prema Templovom tumaåewu „liånosti i dogaœaji u potpunosti predstavqeni u vaseqenskom skladu a ne na zemqi“52. 7. zemaqsku Crkvu saåiwenu od qudi. Tako se potvrœuje izlivawe Svetog Duha i uzlazni put na Gospodu.38). Kada se qudi „obuku u bele haqine“ biñe poput Hrista i æiveñe u sozercawu Wegovog lika „u duãi naslikana“51. Paralela se moæe pronañi i u Templovom polukruænom prikazu nebesa sa polukruænom graœevinom na ikoni.62 Teoloãki åasopis. pronalazimo desnicu Boga. vode i „rijeku vode æivota“ (Otkr. Na vrhu ikone. na koje se iz nebesa izliva blagodat Svetog Duha darujuñi im razne darove. bdi starac. koja se zavrãava plavim lukom (veñ pomiwanom na iluminaciji u Jevanœequ iz Ravule). knez ovoga sveta. belog goluba i/ili plamene zrake koji se spuãtaju na apostole i sve prisutne.1) jer iz utrobe verujuñih „poteñi ñe rijeke vode æive“ (Jn. Templ. Tako apostoli predstavqaju zemqu. 1963: 80. na ikoni Pedesetnice. . U tami. N° 9 nivou Carstva Tame i Zemqe. Æitije svetog Simeona i Save. 2009: 116. 22. Bogdanoviñ. u najviãem i najsvetijem delu. 51 52 Vidi: Teodosije Hilandarac. tj. Materije paralela se moæe pronañi sa kraqem koji prebiva u tami. Geometrijski prikaz podjednako sadræi paralele izmeœu sheme vaseqene i ikone Pedesetnica. Vrhovi graœevine obrazuju obrnut trougao kao simbol Svetog Duha.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 63 Zakquåak Æivot Crkve je suãtinski povezan sa dogmom Trojedinog Boga. Loski. Tako su „struktura kanona i naåelo celokupne hriãñanske strukture (crkvene zajednice. jednu Crkvu. za nas ovaploñenoga. 2003: 120-122.39) delovawe Svetog Duha je dobilo novu dimenziju u odnosu na prethodno delovawe kada je „govorio kroz proroke“. i po svemu onome sa åime Bog zajedniåari i po blagodati se sjediwuje sa svetim anœelima i qudima. . omivena i proåiãñena krvqu Hristovom)“ jer „Hristos uzlazi da bi siãao Duh Sveti“54. „primamo sva crkvena predawa pisana i nepisana. ispuwenu blagodañu Svetog Duha. 2008: 208. 7. verujuñi u Jedno Boæanstvo. 2003: 119. Stoga se „poklawamo ikoni opisanoga. Uspenski. „On silazi u svet i Crkvu (koja je iskupqena. Tako se otkriva i potvrœuje promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta. U woj Boæanstvo obitava telesno kao ãto je obitavalo u oboæenom Hristovom åoveãtvu“53. ponosno prenoseñi poklowewe na prvolik“. Sina Boæijeg. i pre svih najtajanstveniju i sveãtenu Sluæbu i Priåeãñe i Sabrawe (litugrijsko)“. ovo javqawe ne deãava se po suãtini veñ blagodati i sili i energiji koja je zajedniåka Ocu. koje 53 54 55 Loski. i tako daqe) zajedno odraz na zemaqskom planu Boæanskog Trojedinog æivota“55. Tako je Crkva „punota buduñi da je Duh Sveti oæivotvorava i ispuwava Boæanstvom. U skladu sa izdvojenom prirodom i liånostima Svete Trojice. Jer kako kaæe sveti Grigorije Palama. manastiri. Sinu i Duhu. Loski. Crkva gradi odraz nebeskog carstva na zemqi. Tako apostoli åine jedno telo. Triipostasno i Svemoñno. Dogaœajem silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispuweno je obeñawe Spasiteqa i krãtewe Crkve ogwem jer kada je Hristos proslavqen (Jn.

eshatoloãki smisao. perspektiva.64 Teoloãki åasopis. boja. Kompozicija. svaki kompozicijski element ima svoj naroåit. boæanskog sveta vidqivim sredstvima komunikacije. 56 Sveti Grigorije Palama. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. (1978: 473-477). Tako se elementi kompozicije poistoveñuju sa reåima iz svetih spisa a gledawe ikone postaje åitawe koje vodi ka sozercawu Lika Gospodweg. Na ikoni. N° 9 nikako ne gubi jedinstvenost i prostotu zbog sila i Ipostasi (svojih)“56. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. . Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere.

Beograd. Biblija ili Sveto Pismo Staroga i Novoga Zavjeta. Œuro 1998. Benc. . Loski. Princeton: Princeton University. Beograd: Muzej SPC. Azbuånik pravoslavne ikonografije i graditeqstva. Vladimir 2003. Megatrend Univerziteta i Visoka ãkola – Akademija Srpske Pravoslavne Crkve za umetnost i konservaciju. Beograd: Prosveta. Srpska kwiæevna zadruga i Prosveta. Apokrifi novozavetni. Ogled o mistiåkom bogoslovqu Istoåne Crkve. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. Tomislav 2005. Jovanoviñ. Dimitrije 1963. Kurt 1976. Jovanoviñ.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 65 Bibliografija Bogdanoviñ. Beograd: Jugoslovensko biblijsko druãtvo. Ernst 2006. Vizije u hriãñanstvu. Beograd: Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Weitzmann. Zoran 2005. Evdokimov. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Umetnost ikone: teologija lepote. Daniåiñ. Beograd: Åigoja. Stare srpske biografije. Pavle 2009.

66

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Mediñ, Milorad 2002. Stari slikarski priruånici. Beograd: Republiåki zavod za zaãtitu spomenika kulture i Druãtvo prijateqa Svete Gore Atonske. Naniñ, Mirko 2005. Tropari i kondaci za sve dane u godini. Ãid: Srpska pravoslavna zajednica Ãid. Ozoqin, Nikolaj 2007. Pravoslavna ikona Pedesetnice: poreklo i razvoj wenih konstitutivnih tema u Bizantijskoj epohi. Begrad-Ãibenik: Istina, izdavaåka ustanova Eparhije dalmatinske. Ocokoqiñ, Jugoslav 2004. Ikona: åitawe, pisawe i sozercawe sa teologijom ikone. Beograd: Jugoslav Ocokoqiñ. Palama, Grigorije 1978. „Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere“. prev. Atanasije Jevtiñ. Beograd: Teoloãki pogledi 4. Skalova, Zuzana, Gawdat Gabra 2006. Icons of the Nile Waley. Egypt: Egyptian International Pub lishing Company – Longman. Templ, Riåard 2009. Ikone i tajnoviti izvori hriãñanstva. Kragujevac: Kaleniñ. Tomadakis, Nikolaos B., Konstantinos A. Manafis, Grossmann Peter, at al. 1990. Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. ed. Manafis A. Konstantinos. Athens: George A. Christopoulos, John. C. Bastias.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

67

Uspenski, Leonid 2000. Teologija ikone. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Uspenski, Leonid, Vladimir Loski 2008. Smisao ikone. Jasen: Nikãiñ.

68

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost: Written and Painted Sources
Resume This paper will discuss the symbolism of the Christian feast of Pentecost, through the written and painted sources. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and restores the unity of God and people through the spiritual building of the Church. Also, this holiday is especially important because the Holy Spirit descends on each member of the Church and to everyone gives special gifts. The event in which the apostles speak different languages and understand each other is especially important. The particular gift, that occurs through the descend of the Holy Spirit is described in the feast’s icons of Pentecost. In accordance with fact that the picture through the history of Christianity had halting, but a very important role, in transmission of Tradition, emphasis of this work is on research of symbolism of single art elements (color, geometry, perspective), their origin and their role in transmitting of the invisible world by material means on the icon of Pentecost. Keywords: the Pentecost, icons, symbolism, the Holy Spirit.

69 Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu nikola.knezevic@nsts-online.org UDK 233.14 Primljeno: 01.04.2010 Prihvañeno: 05.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

KOMPARATIVNI PRISTUP: PECCATUM ORIGINALE
Rezime Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju poimanja termina prvorodnog greha (lat. peccatum originale) pre svega, u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije (lat. Imago Dei) u åoveku, odnosno, u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada, ili, taånije, u odnosu na ono ãto je od od te slike ostalo. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj, Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Rimokatoliåka tradicija insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena, da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena, ali da nije i izgubljena. Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj, rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju poimanja ljudske prirode, åijoj razlici doprinosi i uvoœenje pojma donum superadditum. Nasuprot tome, u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koja podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. Kljuåne reåi: praroditeljski greh, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

åovek nije sagreãio. åovek je postavljen iznad prirode i predodreœen je da bude posrednik izmeœu Tvorca i beslovesnih biña. Åovekov zadatak nam je nagoveãten u åinjenici da je stvoren po obliåju Boæijem . po prirodi. bez moguñnosti da umre 4 veñ da je imalo moguñnost da ne umre 5 . 2003: 2. N° 9 Posedovanjem lika Boæijeg. Tudoran. svetosti i blaæenstva. otpali od Boga. Stalna komunikacija sa Bogom bi omoguñila stvarnu besmrtnost . bile odreœene za slobodno razvijanje u smeru savrãenstva. Ova obmana je izvedena spretno. prvobitno stanje je obeleæeno savrãenim skladom samoga åoveka. zaslaœena prividnom naivnoãñu. njegov odnos sa Bogom i uslove u kojima je æiveo. Isto. åovek je od Boga primio fiziåku i duhovnu snagu neophodnu za njegovo ostvarenje. i telesno savrãenstvo prvozdanog åoveka jeste bilo samo relativno. telo bilo besmrtno. non posse mori posse non mori Isto.3 Ipak. åovekovo savrãenstvo je bilo relativno. buduñi neokrnjene grehom.dar Boæije blagodati. Sablaænjivi zmijin predlog izaziva u Evinoj duãi oseñaj gordosti koji brzo prerasta u bogoboraåko raspoloæenje kojem se Eva radoznalo podaje i 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vidi: Popoviñ: 1980: 260. i pali u greh.da bi vladao zemljom i svim ãto je na zemlji.1 Stvoren radi visokog i uzviãenog cilja. Pad bi bio neobjaãnjiv da smo zadræali to stanje moralnog savrãenstva. 5.70 Teoloãki åasopis. åovekovog odnosa sa Bogom i åovekovog odnosa sa beslovesnom prirodom. nego su prestupivãi zapovest Boæiju. 6 . Stvoren po liku Boæijem. bezgreãan. Takoœe.6 Naãi praroditelji nisu ostali u stanju prvobitne pravednosti. prema tome. bezgreãnosti. tamu i smrt.2 Imajuñi u vidu svojstva kojima je åovek bio obdaren. bezazlen. svetlosti æivota. nameñe ideju da su njegove duhovne sile. bestrasan. åovek je izaãao iz ruke Boæije neporoåan. Netruleænost i besmrtnost telesna ne znaåi nuæno da je.

ali da nije i izgubljena. Vidi: Franc Courth. Kao ãto je zavist œavola prema Bogu bila uzrok njegovom padu na nebu. Æena navodi muæa da je u tome sledi i on dobrovoljno jede zabranjeni rod. 272. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj. bila povod pogubnog pada prvih ljudi. 1998: 138. 302. odnosno sastavni deo åovekove duhovne i moralne prirode. Vidi: Isto. ili. 14. u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije u åoveku. tako je zavist njegova prema åoveku.8 Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju åovekovog pada. Prvorodni greh nije u potpunosti uniãtio slobodu åoveka te u njemu i dalje postoji odreœeno dobro kao i sposobnost upravljanja prema dobrom. Vidi: Tudoran. 273. rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju ljudske prirode.11 7 8 9 10 11 Vidi: Popoviñ. u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada. donum superadditum). ali nije naudio njegovoj prirodi. justitia originalis). poseban dodatak åovekovim prirodnim silama (lat. kao bogolikom sazdanju Boæijem. da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja.“9 Katoliåka crkva insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena. Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. veñ spoljaãni dar blagodati.10 Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj. u odnosu na ono ãto je od nje ostalo. .7 Ovom svetopisamskom istinom o poreklu i uzroku greha i zla u svetu proæeta je sræ Svetog predanja. veñ „zatamnjen. Obraz Boæiji u åoveku nije u potpunosti izgubljen. jer prirodna teænja razuma i volje prema istini i dobru nije u potpunosti iãåezla. odnosno. pre svega. Vidi: Justin Popoviñ. Prvobitna pravednost nije bila organski. Prvorodni greh je oduzeo Adamu prvobitnu pravednost (lat. taånije.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 71 svesno krãi Boæiju zapovest.

138. N° 9 Nasuprot tome.“15 Reformisano veroispovedanje iz 17. Vidi: Bloesch. Bente: 1921: XVIII poglavlje. u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koje prvobitno potiåe od blaæenog Avgustina12 i podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. tvrdi sledeñe: „U åoveku je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo koje u njemu åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. kasniji uticaj greha na celo stvorenje. Veñ se na poåetku starozavetne poruke nazire dinamika razvoja „grehovne sile“ koja pri padu prvosazdanih ljudi dobija svoj zamajac. sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina kaæe „da je åoveku bez Boæije pomoñi nemoguñe åak i poåeti svoj put ka Bogu.“16 Ipak. odnosno. slava Boæija je okrnjena. iako tekst implicira njegovu pojavu i posledice. nije sigurno da se ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga.17 Svetopisamsko poimanje praroditeljskog greha U Starom zavetu ne postoji eksplicitno definisan praroditeljski greh. Imago Dei je potamnela.. ali nije uniãtena. meœutim. Vidi: Bloesch. Vidi: Franc Courth. Kanoni sa sinode u Dortrehtu 1618-1619: 2007: 51. pogreãno je reñi da je iz åoveka u potpunosti iãåezla prirodna dobrota ili sloboda.14 Augzburãko veroispovedanje. F. sa viãe optimizma. niti je njime moguñe obratiti mu se. i poprima sve veñe dimenzije ostavljajuñi posledice zbog kojih trpi sav ljudski rod. ali nije nestala.72 Teoloãki åasopis. 1989: 90. 1989: 90. nemoguñe da se okrene Bogu svojom voljom. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Vidi: Augustine. 1948: 644.. poãto je greh zaposeo sve pore njegovog biña. ãiri se.13 Luter je smatrao da je åoveku. veka. .

23). Savremena egzegeza ovakvo tumaåenje smatra spornim zbog nedostatka konteksta. Adam predstavlja jedinstvo ljudskog roda.“ 19 Postoje mnoga mesta u Starom zavetu koja direktno svedoåe o tome da su svi ljudi. U proroåkoj i mudrosnoj literaturi Starog zaveta se postepeno razvija individualistiåko shvatanje greha i njegovih posledica.23 Misao o univerzalnosti istorije spasenja u Hristu i o nesretnom dogaœaju sa Adamom izrazio je idejom korporativne specifiånosti. dok se stihom iz Psalma dokazivalo greãno stanje sveta i åoveka (lat. Stihovima iz 1Moj 3 se dokazivao „uzroåni greh“ kojim je greh uãao u svet (lat. a Adamova greãka ukazuje na to da kada je greh u pitanju. 9-10. 46. sagreãili (1Moj 6. druãtvene posledice greha i liånu odgovornost poåinioca – svaki greh je greh protiv Saveza i liåni greh protiv Boga.“22 Apostol Pavle se ovde bavi Adamom jer mu on otvara moguñnost da govori o uticaju Hrista koji je sveopãti. i da su sve misli srca njihovog svagda samo zle. meœu ljudima nema razlike: „Kao ãto je napisano: Nema ni jednog pravednog. peccatum originale originans). pokaja se Gospod ãto je stvorio åoveka na zemlji.“ 18 sa kasnijom konstatacijom: „I Gospod videñi da je nevaljalstvo ljudsko veliko na zemlji. bez izuzetaka. 5-6. dobro beãe veoma. . 15.21 Pojam praroditeljskog greha je neãto odreœeniji u Novom zavetu. Vidi: Isto. kao i greh. Starozavetna poruka jasno naglaãava dvojnost greha. Po apostolu Pavlu. 2003: 166. Ps 13. 1Car 8. 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 Moj 1. 31. i bi mu æao u srcu.20 Tridentski sabor je tekstovima iz 1Moj 3 i Ps 51. 1 Moj 6. i gle.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 73 Uporedimo reåi Stvoritelja na vrhuncu ãestodneva: „Tada pogleda Bog sve ãto je stvorio. 2-3. peccatum originale originatum). odnosno. 5 i 8. Vidi: Nemet. 5 (7) definisao dogmu o praroditeljskom grehu. 167. Uporedi: Rim 5. Rim 3. 21. Jer 13.

kada najviãem åinu svoga stvaranja daje moguñnost da se okrene od njega. . Naæalost. kao biñe koje je posedovalo slobodnu volju. Prvi åovek je bio savrãen u tom smislu ãto je i njegovo duhovno i fiziåko bilo na najviãem stepenu i omoguñavalo mu je da ispuni svoj zadatak. Grigorije Niski. åovek je stvoren kao slovesno. U ovome se najbolje oåitava veliåina Boæije intervencije i veliåina Stvoritelja samog. koje su postale delom åovekove prirode nakon njegovog pada u greh i koje su posledica ogrehovljenja same åovekove prirode. Zavist jednog od nekada najveñih meœu heruvimima. Vidi: Tudoran. Vidi: Isto. bol. Sv. 6. „izumitelja zla“ kako ga joã naziva Sv.26 Takvo stanje savrãentsva podrazumeva i åinjenicu da je åovek sazdan kao biñe kojem su bile strane bolesti. Njegov um je posedovao brojna znanja. on joã uvek nije bio moralno dovrãena liånost. patnje. bez sklonosti ka grehu. kao ãto je Hrist predvodnik izbavljenih. Adam nije imao apsolutno spoznajno i moralno savrãenstvo. 4. dakle. a samim tim slobodnim kada je u pitanju volja. Grigorije Niski. svojom 24 25 26 27 Vidi: Courth. 2001: 208 (poglavlje 26). ali sa moguñnoãñu da sagreãi. tako i volje. N° 9 Adam je predak apostola naroda i tip greãnog åoveåanstva.24 Istoåna tradicija Pravoslavno uåenje stanje prvosazdanog åoveka objaãnjava na ovaj naåin: „Stanje nevinosti ili odsustva greha … nepoznavanje greha ili nedostatak æelje za ogrehovljenjem… Pre no ãto je sagreãio Adam je bio u stanju harmonije. Prevashodno. ujedinjenog savrãenstva i pravde. slobodno biñe sa moguñnoãñu da odluåuje. 1998:108. njegova volja savrãenu pravednost i dobrotu.74 Teoloãki åasopis. kako uma.27 Na kraju. slobodna volja ljudskog biña postaje oruœe njegovog ropstva.“25 Stvorio ga je Bog.

Naslednost prvorodnog greha sveopãta je. mnogo viãe im je naãkodila njihova vlastita æelja nego nagovor zmije. Vidi: Popoviñ. Åak i da kuãaå nije doãao. preneo je svoju palu prirodu na svoje potomstvo. Ovakav prestup Boæije zapovesti poslediåno postaje grehom celog ljudskog roda. on ne podrazumeva apriori i „nasleœenu krivicu“. jer niko od ljudi nije izuzet od toga osim Bogoåoveka. stradanja i smrt. oskrnavljenost srca. 290. pomraåenje razuma. Sveti Jefrem Sirijski kaæe da je Adam u sebi posedovao potencijal za ovakav ishod: „Reå iskuãenja ne bi odvela u greh one ãto su iskuãavani da kuãaåa nije rukovodila njihova sopstvena æelja. to jest. Åovekov Pad: 3. ali se ta krivica ne prenosi na potomke.31 Vaæno je reñi da u pravoslavnoj antropologiji nasledni greh nema Avgustinske implikacije.29 Greãnost ljudske prirode. drvo bi svojom lepotom uvelo njihova srca u rat. osiromaãenja i smrtnosti. greh koji je uåinio otac ljudskog roda. Jasno je. Vidi: Isto. kao kategorija i zakon greha koji æivi u åoveku i dejstvuje u njemu i kroz njega. bolesti. Buduñi da je Adam bio otac celog åoveåanstva.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 75 ruãilaåkom tendencijom uspeva da zavede ljudsko biñe i tako dovede do promene njegove same prirode . Najzad. potiåuñi od Adama. iskvarenost volje. Gospoda Isusa Hrista. 28 29 30 31 Serafim Rouz. . œavolje iskuãenje je uspelo zbog toga ãto je on znao (ili je pretpostavljao) ãta se nalazi u srcu samoga åoveka. 287. veñ podrazumeva osobinu svakog pojedinca da se lakãe upravlja prema zlu nego prema dobru. Vidi: Isto. Iako su praroditelji traæili opravdanje za sebe u nagovoru zmije. projavljuje se u svima bez izuzetka kao neko æivo greãno naåelo.30 Na ceo ljudski rod kao deo izmenjene åovekove prirode prenose se i sve posledice pada: unakaæenost lica Boæijeg. dakle."28 Tako nastaje prvi greh. da prvosazdani ljudi snose krivicu za grehopad.otuda i naziv prvorodni ili praroditeljski greh. 295. samim tim i greh sa svim svojim posledicama i kaznama .njenog ograniåenja.

Liãen zajednice sa Bogom. 2001: 121. 35 Kako je to svojevremeno govorio Sv. sliåno onima koji su iz nesmotrenosti upali u blato i ukaljali lice svoje. U fiziåkom smislu. 2001: 40. 1980: 282. (17:2) Popoviñ. Romanidis. te ih åak ni poznanici ne mogu raspoznati.32 Umesto do savrãentstva i oboæenja.33 Pad ljudskog biña ontoloãki menja celokupno stvorenje. 8. kod ljudskog biña je doãlo do izopaåenja i gubitka dostojanstva koje je bilo ravno anœeoskom. otuœen tako od samoga sebe i oslabljene volje. podelu unutar samoga sebe i drugih ljudi. taãtina i depresija su postale svakodnevnica ljudskog roda. krenuli su putem otuœenosti od Boga i sopstvene prirode. Grigorije Niski. liãio sebe svog dostojanstva upavãi u blato greha. Vidi: Sv. N° 9 Prestupanjem zapovesti prvosazdani ljudi podlegli su Sataninoj obmani i promaãili svoje prvobitno naznaåenje. sa Bogom i sa prirodom: telo se viãe ne pokorava duãi. 1979: 59.“34 Posledice pada ljudskog roda bile su fiziåkog i moralnog karaktera. priroda viãe ne sluæi åoveku. åovek postaje rob greha.“ 37 32 33 34 35 36 37 Ware. 1979: 60. Grigorije Niski. bolu. veliko i dragoceno stvorenje. starosti i na kraju smrti. i do oblaåenja u smrtnost.76 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Ware. ljudska biña su postala podloæna bolesti. Åovek je postao predmet unutraãnjeg otuœenja. frustracije. . on je prouzrokovao podelu. podelu izmeœu sebe i prirodnog sveta. Greh naruãava harmoniju åoveka sa samim sobom. Umesto da igra ulogu posrednika i ujedinitelja. Vidi: Tudoran. a kada mu sluæi. izgubio je lik netruleænog Boga i kroz greh se obukao u lik truleæi i praãine.36 „Tako je åovek. åini to sa naporom. U moralnom smislu. postao je neprijatelj samome sebi. veñ se prostire i na beslovesne æivotinje i na beslovesnu prirodu. tvrdi pravoslavni bogoslov Kalistos Ver. veñ teæi da je zavede. „pad nije ograniåen samo na ljudski rod.

Na osnovu ljudske istorije.“40 Ljudsko biñe je i dalje sposobno da se opredeljuje prema dobru. U odnosu na poreklo smrti. pomraåen i unakaæen. Naglaãavajuñi ovo. to je protivno ljudskoj prirodi kojoj je mnogo lakãe da se rukovodi upravo suprotnim. odnosno. kako je to rekao ava Justin: „duboko povreœen. tada se stvara bezizlaz u vezi sa prenoãenjem smrti i propadljivosti na potomke Adamove.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 77 Poãto se priroda ljudskog biña ontoloãki promenila. veñ naprotiv. Sveti Jovan Zlatousti govori. posle pada.“38 Posledica toga je i fiziåka smrt. umrli.“39 Ono ãto pravoslavnu antropologiju åini autentiånom i najoptimistiånijom jeste upravo njeno poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku nakon grehopada. u pravoslavnoj antropologiji. Romanidis kaæe sledeñe: „Ako se jednom prihvati da propadljivost i smrt predstavljaju kaznu od Boga za sve ljude. Popoviñ. Romanidis. saåuvala dobrota Boæija. i ljudski rod je doæiveo fiziåku smrt. Da bi se. pod tim predpostavkama. o duhovnoj smrti kada kaæe za prvosazdane ljude da su „u trenutku kad su åuli reåi: prah si i u prah ñeã se vratiti. i manje optimistiånih tumaåenja protestanskog stanoviãta „potpune iskvarenosti“. ipak. veñ. ali. pre svega. natprirodnog i inputiranog dara koji na taj naåin i nije åinio deo ogranske prirode åoveka. åoveåanstvo po svaku cenu mora biti krivac za pad. delimiåno slobodna. vrlo je vaæno reñi da nije Bog tvorac smrti veñ œavo. Za razliku od rimokatoliåke antropologije koja unakaæenje lika vidi kao gubitak åovekove „prvobitne pravednosti“. zaklju38 39 40 Serafim Rouz. Bog je dopustio smrt ne zbog nekakvog kaænjeniåkog raspoloæenja boæanske pravednosti. lik Boæiji u åoveku nije uniãten. primili smrtnu presudu. postali smrtni i moæemo reñi. zbog boæanske ljubavi prema åoveku. 1980: 282. Åovekova volja ostaje samo uslovno. kada je u pitanju pravoslavna antropologija. Åovekov Pad: 8. . 2001: 234.

62. Apostol Pavle. ali u manjoj meri. kako to tvrde neka pesimistiånija kalvinistiåka stanoviãta. åime se podrazumeva da on i dalje poseduje odreœeno bogopoznanje. åovek je joã uvek sposoban za poærtvovanje i samilost. Kalistos Ver kaæe da ona (pravoslavna tradicija) bez umanivanja samih posledica pada ne smatra da je pad rezultirao „totalnom iskvarenoãñu”. Kada se razmatra problematika pada ljudskog biña. Vidi: Ware. odnosno. Sagledañemo poimanje pada ljudskog biña u greh i njegove posledice sa stanoviãta rimokatoliåke i protestanske antropologije. na prvi pogled. nailazimo na manje ili viãe opreåna stanoviãta. prema tome. neophodan. Boæanski lik u åoveku. ukljuåujuñi i slobodu izbora koju on ima. te mu je. povratak na poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku je neizbeæan i prvenstveno. 19 . Razmatrajuñi åovekov pad i posledice pada iz perspektive zapadne hriãñanske tradicije i poredeñi ga sa stanoviãtem pravoslavne antropologije. ostao je zamuñen ali ne i uniãten. 41 Sumirajuñi stanoviãte pravoslavne tradicije po ovom pitanju.20. Pravoslavna i rimokatoliåka antropologija se podudaraju u tvrdnji da je lik Boæiji u åoveku posle grehopada osiromaãen. Åak i u palom svetu. meœutim. 41 42 Rim 1. protestantskom pogledu na imago Dei. po milosti Boæijoj. N° 9 åujemo da je åoveku data moguñnost bogopoznanja kako o tome svedoåi i Sv. na razliåite naåine gledaju na prirodu ljudskog biña. a razlikuje se od nje u odnosu na posledice pada i dalje soterioloãke implikacije.78 Teoloãki åasopis. . omoguñeno da stupi u zajedniãtvo sa Bogom.42 Zapadna tradicija U prethodnim poglavljima je veñ bilo reåi o rimokatoliåkom. Protestanska antropologija je sliåna pravoslavnoj u odnosu na prirodu åoveka.

to jest. åovek je i dalje u moguñnosti da bira izmeœu dobra i zla. dovodeñi ga. 2003: 174. Vidi: Nemet: 2003: 173. u 43 44 45 Vidi: Isto.45 Avgustin produbljuje teoloãki smisao pokvarenosti åoveka. Greh je ono ãto se moæe izbeñi. te. greh nije neãto supstancijalno i ne pripada prirodi åoveka. 108.46 a kako drugi smatraju. do suprotne krajnosti. kako jedni smatraju. onda su svi greãni i svi imaju potrebu za otkupljenjem i spasenjem. imaju nasledni greh od kojeg se oslobaœaju krãtenjem. Nemet. prema tome.44 U jeku rasprave blaæenog Avgustina sa Pelagijem. shvatanje spasenja i praksa krãtenja su bili uobiåajeno povezani s priznavanjem odreœenog greãnog stanja u kojem se åovek nalazi. prema Avgustinu je u poremeñenom odnosu prema Bogu. Meliton pod nasledstvom podrazumeva nesretno stanje åoveka koje ga podjarmljuje i zavodi na greh. po uåenju Pelagija. Razvio je teoriju o poreklu i naslednosti greha. s obzirom da greh zavisi iskljuåivo od slobodne volje. greh je potpuno sluåajna trenutna pojava koja niåe jedino u oblasti slobodne volje i to poãto se u njoj razvije sloboda koja ga jedina moæe proizvesti. Ãtaviãe. Ovom temom su se bavili joã i Sv. jer iako moralno nevina. åovek moæe biti bez greha. O ovome vidi viãe u Justin: 1980: 301-307. Vidi: Justin. Pelagije je engleski monah iz åetvrtog veka åije je uåenje proglaãeno jeretiåkim. do potpune pokvarenosti åoveka. Meliton Sardski govori o grehu koji je ljudski rod nasledio od Adama.47 Avgustin polazi od razmiãljanja o crkvenoj praksi krãtenja dece koja podrazumeva da su deca greãnici. 46 47 . Irinej Lionski i Tertulian: polazili su od istine da je otkupljenje potrebno svima. 110. 1980: 300. jer ako je Hrist umro za sve.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 79 Crkvena tradicija Joã krajem drugog veka.43 Veñ u prvim vekovima. do taåke kristalizacije. Vidi: Courth. Bit praroditeljskog greha. Po Pelagiju. boreñi se protiv markionizma i gnosticizma. bez uticaja Boæanskog.

godine na koji ñe se skoro hiljadu godina kasnije pozivati na Tridentskom saboru.48 Hiponski biskup.80 Teoloãki åasopis. premda ga ona uslovljava. veñ i realno greãnim biñem koje u njemu postoji i kojim se unapred odreœuje za veånu osudu. N° 9 oholosti i samoljublju. Sabor je pre svega posmatrao odnos ranjene prirode ljudskog biña i milosti spasenja. Isto. koje je na ovim saborima i zvaniåno prihvañeno. Vidi: Isto.“ tako i kaznu koju je Stvoritelj. . govori o poæudi koja se smatra nasledstvom od prvosazdanog åoveka i samim tim i izvorom liånih greha. 207. i za koju ga. ne moæemo pozvati na odgovornost. na osnovu uverenja o greãnom stanju u kojem se nalazi svaki Adamov potomak. zbog Adamove neposluãnosti.“ 50 Kao takav.52 Nesumnjivo je da je na oba sabora Avgustinovo shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. Vidi: Scola.49 Avgustinova nauka o praroditeljskom grehu suãtinski se svodi na åinjenicu da åovek „dolazi na svet obeleæen. Vidi: Courth. povezano s duãevnom smrñu. godine u Kartagini. 48 49 50 51 52 Vidi: Courth. Marengo. 116. Sabor na kojem se dalje razvijalo stanoviãte zapadne crkve o praroditeljskom grehu bio je sabor u Oranæu 529. 114. 1998: 111.51 Sabori u Kartagini i Oranæu Teoloãka rasprava sa Pelagijem i njegovim uåenjem dovela je do sazivanja crkvenog sabora afriåkih crkava 418. ne samo nekom opãtom pokvarenoãñu koja mu prethodi. praroditeljski greh podrazumeva. Na crkvenom saboru je bilo prihvañeno nekoliko kanona i odluka koje su se odnosile na pojam i shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. kako „razjedninjenje åoveka. 2003: 206. Prades. imalo presudan znaåaj i veliki uticaj. nametnuo svim ljudima.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 81 Nakon sabora u Oranæu vekovima nije postojalo veñe interesovanje za problematiku praroditeljskog greha ali je izvesno interesovanje u srednjem veku formiralo stav da se prisutnost sluåajne pokvarenosti ljudske naravi. poãto je Adam uzor åovekovog morala i predstavnika celog åoveåantsva. 208. Vidi: Fairweather. sve ljude stavlja u poloæaj neprijateljstva prema Bogu. definisao je praroditeljski greh kao sintezu dva elementa: potpunog gubitka54 izvorne ili prvobitne pravednosti55 kao formalnoga elementa i poæude kao materijalnog elementa. prepoznaje u prisutnosti poæude. Vidi: Isto. 124. veku jedan on najveñih teologa katoliåke crkve. kako ga joã Akvinski naziva. Takoœe. Vidi: Isto. Marengo. Isto. 121. 1954: 124. Prades. umrtvljenost ljudske prirode. Praroditeljski greh predstavlja.Akvinski razum i intelekt smatra duãevnim elementima koji su usmereni prema dobru dok je „niæi“ deo duãe usmeren ka zlu. Vidi. 57 Vaæno je spomenuti i ulogu „prvobitne“ pravednosti u åoveku. sledeñi Anselma iz Aoste i koristeñi se skolastiåkom terminologijom. koja. Gubitak prvobitne milosti predstavlja formalnu prirodu praroditeljskog greha. predstavlja gubitak sklada duãevnih elemenata . poåevãi od Adama. 53 Toma Akvinski U 13. Toma Akvinski. . na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha se gleda i kao na moralnu solidarnost ljudskog roda sa Adamom. kao materijalni element. 120. Svaka poæuda.56 Formalna priroda praroditeljskog greha je odreœena njegovim uzrokom koji je suprotan prvobitnoj milosti koja se sastoji iz posluãnosti ljudskog biña Boæijoj volji. Toma Akvinski ulogu prvobitne milosti vidi kao ravnoteæu 53 54 55 56 57 Vidi: Scola.

stanje bez blagodati?59 Tomistiåko viœenje praroditeljskog greha je nesumljivo ostavilo traga na veliki Sabor koji ñe uslediti nekoliko vekova kasnije. bez Boæije intervencije. 1989: 91. 1957: 261.58 Imajuñi ovo u vidu. odnosno. Vidi: Popoviñ. Vidi: Calvin. Da li bi bilo potrebno stavljati elemente u ravnoteæu da „niæi“ deo duãe nije i pre Adamovog pada bio usmeren ka zlu? Da li je doctor Angelicus ukazao na manihejski dualizam ljudske prirode i pre njegovog pada. srcem. problematika praroditeljskog greha dobija drugaåiji naglasak. pioniri reformacije.82 Teoloãki åasopis. Sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina. N° 9 izmeœu duãevnih elemenata (razum. Nije jasno da li je priroda åoveka. Vidi: Bloesh. Treñi ålan treñeg poglavlja kanona sa sabora u Dortu glasi ovako: 58 59 60 61 62 Vidi: Isto. veku. u jeku reformacije. i na hamartiologiju Katoliåke crkve upãte. intelekt i niæi delovi duãe).62 Ljudsko biñe se raœa pokvareno. ili je samo izmenjena njena moguñnost da se usmerava ka dobrom. Isto: 96. zakljuåujemo da justitia originalis po Akvinskom nije bila organski deo ljudske prirode. Greh zahvata sve pore ljudskog biña i onemoguñava mu da se okrene Bogu sopstvenom voljom. kako bi onda priroda nakon grehopada mogla da ostane u neizmenjenom stanju? Da li to znaåi da se ljudsko biñe nakon grehopada vraña u svoje prirodno stanje.60 Luter je opisao åoveka zarobljenog grehom kao incurvatus-a (savijen prema sebi). nakon grehopada povreœena. po Akvinskom. jer ako jeste. Reformacija U 16. 302. Luter i Kalvin gledali su na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha kao na silu koja je u potpunosti ovladala ljudskim biñem. i svim njegovim delima. . njegovim umom. 126.61 a njegovu pokvarenost kao „duboku i zlu“.

68 Takoœe. i time otklanja prokletstvo greha sa ljudskog biña. Barth. niti se mogu vratiti Bogu. a ne samo jedan njen deo66 .“63 83 Luter je definisao znaåenje reåi concupiscentia neãto drugaåije. . Åovek i dalje poseduje takozvanu graœansku pravednost (lat. i volja ljudskog biña nije u potpunosti zarobljena. kao izopaåenje ljudske prirode i kao samu suãtinu ljudskog greha. niti mogu ispraviti izopaåenu narav i tu doneti poboljãanje. civilis justitia). skloni zlu.“65 Bruner smatra da je greh promenio i izopaåio celokupnu ljudsku prirodu.htm 66 67 68 Brunner. veñ poniãtava njegovo pripisivanje åoveku.67 a ipak smatra da slika Boæija nije nestala iz åoveka.sa- 65 Drugo Helvetsko veroispovedanje. åak ni da mislimo ni o åemu dobrom.com/chr/2helvcnf. cred-texts. 1959: 500. nismo u moguñnosti sami od sebe da åinimo. http://www. osude i mrænje prema Bogu. Concupiscense. Bloesh. veñ je u nemoguñnosti da usmerava åoveka da iãta uradi u pogledu svog spasenja bez uticaja Boæanske spasonosne milosti. dodavãi pritom. Vidi: Catholic Encyclopedia. Karl Bart opisuje åoveka kao „korenito i potpuno pokvarenog“. moguñnost da i dalje razumom u svakodnevnom æivotu 63 64 Kanoni sa sinoda u Dordrechtu.64 Reåi osmog poglavlja Drugog Helvetskog veropispovedanja imaju radikalniji prizvuk: „Puni zloñe (=ljudi). umrli u grehu i robovi greha.deo slike Boæije je ostao u ljudskoj prirodi. suprotno katoliåkom uåenju. da krãtenje ne poniãtava krivicu praroditeljskog greha. nepoverenja. ne æele. odnosno. 1953. 2007: 50. nesposobni za svako spasonosno delo. 137.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet „Svi ljudi su zaåeti u grehu i raœaju se kao sinovi gneva. Bez milosti Duha Svetoga koji preporaœa. veñ je samo potamnela. 94.

joã uvek poseduje sposobnost za spoznaju pravednosti.71 U ljudskom biñu je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo: „Zahvaljujuñi tome. . iako je moguñnost ove spoznaje svedena na minimum. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. doprinose tome da ljudsko biñe. Vidi: Bloesh: 90. Herman. kao i za moralna naåela koja se 69 70 71 72 Hanko. za delove mudrosti i istina koje su prisutne u nehriñanskim religijama. Ãta je taåno obuhvañeno ovim pojmom? Potrebno je pojaãnjenje ovog pojma da bismo izbegli njegovo radikalno razumevanje. a posebno Kalvinizma. ålan Augzburãkog veroispovedanja. ono åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. apsolutna pokvarenost implicira iskvarenost ljudskog biña u celini (u njemu ne ostaje ni trunke dobra) i nemoguñnost razlikovanja dobra od zla. Ona podrazumeva da je svaki deo ljudskog biña oãteñen grehom. Van Baren. 69 Potpuna pokvarenost predstavlja rezultat pada ljudskog biña u greh. ali istovremeno naglaãava da ljudsko biñe nije pokvareno u celosti. kako o tome svedoåi 11. Stanoviãte protestanske provenijencije. odnosno.“72 Opãta Boæija milost. Suãtina razumevanja pojma je u razlikovanju potpunog od apsolutnog. Ovakvo tumaåenje radikalizuje pojam potpune pokvarenosti i ne predstavlja suãtinu poruke koju su Kalvin i kasnije sabor u Dortu ispovedali. po pitanju praroditeljskog greha se najåeãñe povezuje sa pojmom potpune pokvarenosti. 1976. Dakle. i pokazuje neko nastojanje oko kreposti i discipline. 50. imago Dei u åoveku jeste oãteñena ali ona joã uvek postoji.70 Nasuprot tome. N° 9 delimiåno razlikuje dobro i zlo. te razlikuje izmeœu onoga ãto je åasno i neåasno. Isto. Opãta milost omoguñava odreœene spoznaje o Bogu. okrnjena je ali nije uniãtena. kao i imago Dei. ãto pruæa objaãnjenje za delimiåno Bogopoznanje.84 Teoloãki åasopis.

i zadræati ga u nepravdi.. jer celo njegovo biñe odraæava slavu njegovog Stvoritelja. sva njegova dobra dela zaraæena su greãnom motivacijom ili namisli. Ljudskom pravednoãñu se moæe steñi poãtovanje i divljenje ljudi. 50.“76 73 74 75 76 Vidi: Bloesh: 91. jer se okrenuo od Boga da bi postigao vlastite ciljeve. odraz Boæijeg biña u åoveku. ali ne i Boga. govorio je Luter. odliåno je defisao sloæenu postavku kompleskne teoloãke postavke: „Imago Dei. Govoriti o apsolutnoj iskvarenosti kao opãtem stanoviãtu unutar protestantizma bilo bi suviãe jednostrano. pa samim tim. jer se åovek ne koristi ispravno prirodnim i graœanskim stvarima. Åitav åovek je biser. iz Boæijeg ugla. ali nije uniãten. naruãen je. Bloesh.. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 85 mogu videti u kulturama najstarijih civilizacija. 91. savremeni protestanski teolog. i naprotiv. Bloesh. åovek je æalosno okrnjen biser. ipak. iako je njegova sloboda znaåajno oslabljena i oãteñena. pokuãava na razliåite naåine ugasiti ovo svetlo.73 Ovo svetlo ipak nije dovoljno za dolaæenje do Bogopoznanja koje vodi ka spasenju: „Ali nije sigurno da se s ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga niti je moguñe njemu se obratiti. 95. Åovek je i dalje odgovoran pred Bogom. ona neprihvatljiva. i tako dok neãto åini. biti bez isprike pred Bogom“74 Buduñi da je ljudsko biñe delimiåno u moguñnosti da åini dela pravednosti i da doœe do odreœenog stepena moralnih vrlina. Donald Bloã. .75 Postoji izvesna polarizovanost stanoviãta protestantskih teologa po pitanju shvatanja ljudske prirode posle grehopada.

naglaãavaju da se praroditeljski greh prenosi i odnosi na celo åoveåanstvo. juna 1546. J. Vidi: Courth. kanonu ispoveda se da se praroditeljski greh ne prenosi oponaãanjem.79 U 2. Tridentski sabor je naglasio naåelnu neophodnost spasenja svih ljudi 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Danaãnji Trento. Nemet. prema tome. Ni na jednom drugom saboru do tada nije bilo potrebe za odluåivanjem o tako vaænim pitanjima pod tako teãkim okolnostima. Waterworth: 1848. 21. U 4.82 Krãtenje. 141. nego da je za to potrebna i vera pojedinca.78 U 1. 21. 140. kanonu crkveni oci. U 5. . 2003: 180.83 U 6. kanonu dekreta sabor se odreœuje prema tradiciji anselmovsko – tomistiåkog poimanja praroditeljskog greha kao gubitka iskonske svetosti i pravednosti. odræan je Tridentski77 sabor. Vidi: Courth. vraña åoveka u odnos prijateljstva sa Bogom. veka. 184.80 U 3. izmeœu 1545-1563. Na saboru je 17. sredinom 16. godine proglaãeno 6 kanona o praroditeljskom grehu. kanonu se razmatra Luterovo poimanje krãtenja 81 i nasuprot Luteru. Isto. Italija. sabor naglaãava kako ova sveta tajna u potpunosti i u njegovoj biti briãe praroditeljski greh. kanonu se istiåe neutralan stav u odnosu na bezgreãno zaåeñe Majke Boæije. Vidi: Nemet. veñ potomstvom i poreklom.84 Tridentski sabor je bio od velikog znaåaja za poimanje praroditeljskog greha i za razvoj æivota unutar Katoliåke crkve dobar deo Sabora je bio posveñen raspravama o crkvenim tajnama. godine. N° 9 Tridentski Sabor Kao odgovor na teoloãke i eklesioloãke izazove Reformacije.86 Teoloãki åasopis. Luter je smatrao da krãtenje ne briãe u potpunosti praroditeljski greh. sledeñi Sv. kanonu se istiåe vaænost krãtenja dece. Apostola Pavla.

Takoœe.88 85 86 87 88 Vidi: Isto. Vidi: Nemet. papa Pije XII u svojoj enciklici pod nazivom „Humani generis“. Spremao se novi izazov za teologiju: na koji naåin odgovoriti na savremena nauåna pitanja i da li je moguñe pomiriti ove dve. poziva bogoslove da pokuãaju da pomire nauåno i versko shvatanje porekla æivota. ålan 37. ålanu enciklike istiåe da je moguñe da ljudsko telo ima svoj evolutivni poredak. naizgled suprostavljene strane. ålan 36. Vidi: Humani Generis. i da se taj greh preneo na celo njegovo potomstvo. Tako se. 2003. veka. donekle je smanjio teoloãke tenzije izmeœu Katoliåke crkve i Protestantizma. U ovakvom druãtvenom stanju svesti mnogi bogoslovi su traæili put ka sintezi verskih istina i dostignuña savremene nauke. zbog novih erminevtiåkih pristupa. primera radi.85 Savremena shvatanja praroditeljskog greha Krajem 19.87 U 37. ponovo se budi interesovanje za pojmom praroditeljskog greha. 185. kao i zbog mnogih arheoloãkih otkriña. . ålanu je potvrœen monogenizam i åinjenica da Adam nije metaforiåki prikaz viãe parova i snaæno je naglaãena åinjenica da je greh poåinio pojedinac. i poåetkom 20. godine.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 87 i znaåaj krãtenja kao svete tajne koja briãe praroditeljski greh (sa ostatkom poæude kao posledice praroditeljskog greha). Vidi: Isto. novih filosofskih tendencija i poimanja sveta. odnosno Adam. nauånog objaãnjenja porekla æivota na zemlji i stvaranja sveta uopãte. razvoja prirodnih nauka. 143. ali da je za stvaranje åovekove duãe zasluæan samo Bog. u 36.86 Joã 1950.

velikog bogoslova Katoliåke crkve iz proãloga veka. koji je joã jednom naglasio vaænost åinjenice da Adamov greh ne moæe biti inputiran u nas. da bude pred Bogom. 90 91 92 93 94 95 Gaudium et Spes.94 Posledice pada i iskvarenosti ljudske prirode prenose se na celokupno stvorenje95 kao i na sve 89 Odræan izmeœu 1962 . ålan 398. Isto. Formulacija Sabora o praroditeljskom grehu je kratka i jasna i joã jednom naglaãava podeljenost åovekove prirode.88 Teoloãki åasopis.“93 Posledice pada su gubitak prvobitne pravednosti i iskvarenost slike Boæije u åoveku. N° 9 Drugi vatikanski sabor89 se nije posebno osvrtao na pitanje praroditeljskog greha. Katehizam definiãe sadræaj praroditeljskog greha kao gubitak poverenja u Stvoritelja. Rahner. Vaæno je spomenuti i miãljenje Karla Ranera.“90 Takoœe. Vidi: Isto. otvorio ga je Papa Jovan XXIII. joã jednom naglaãava nemoguñnost åoveka da se bori protiv zla u sebi bez Boæije pomoñi. zloupotrebu date slobode i neposluãnost prema Boæijoj zapovesti. veñ je njegovu formulaciju ostavio u okvirima koji su utvœeni na Tridentskom saboru. izmeœu svetlosti i tame. zatvorio Papa Pavle VI. ålan 13. godine. jer ona predstavlja delo liåne slobode pojedinca (=Adama) u kojoj je osoba jedinstvena i niko ne moæe da zauzme njeno mesto.1965. vaæan dokument sa kraja proãlog veka koji je okupio najvaænije bogoslove Katoliåke crkve.92 Åovek je pao u okrilje greha voœen æeljom „da bude kao Bog.91 Veliki znaåaj pojmu praroditeljskog greha nesumnjivo daje i Katehizam Katoliåke Crkve. ali bez Boga. ålan 400. biña u kome se vodi „dramatiåna borba izmeœu dobra i zla. ali ne i u saglasnosti sa njim. . Vidi: Isto. Vidi: Cathehism of Catholic Church. 1982: 111. 1993: ålan 397. ålan 399. pa se ni liåna Adamova krivica ne moæe na nas preneti.

98 99 . ålan 405. da doprinese i novim pogledima na shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. ranjena i teæi97 ka grehu. ålan 402. odnosno. Pribliæavanje bogoslovskih stavova Pravoslavne i Rimokatoliåke crkve.org/cathen/04208a.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 89 Adamove potomke.htm Vidi: Isto.newadvent. Vidi o tome viãe: Concupiscense. iako je oãteñena. nihilistiåkih i naturalistiåkih svetonazora zahtevaju ozbiljan pristup i odgovor od strane hriãñanskih provenijencija.99 Izazovi u vidu najnovijih nauånih dostignuña i savremene kulture koja teæi ka tome da trivijalizuje i relazivizuje pojam greha uopãte. u buduñnosti. 2003: 189.98 Drugim reåima. kao i njihov zajedniåki dijalog sa protestanskim denominacijama. stavljaju danaãnje bogoslove pred novi i nimalo lak zadatak.96 Iako se greh prenosi na sve potomke. Nema sumnje da savremena sekularizacija druãtva i devijacija moralno – kulturnih normi i obrazaca. http://www. greh je nasleœen ali ne i poåinjen. Nemet. Latinska reå concupiscentia oznaåa unutraãnju teænju i sklonost ljudskog biña da åini greh. Catholic Encyclopedia. prihvatajuñi stanoviãta opreåna crkvenom uåenju kao opãte prihvañene normative. on ne nosi i liånu krivicu za Adamov greh. kao i generalizovanju jednog svehriãñanskog stanoviãta. Niske pobude suprotne razumu. izazovi egzistencijalistiåkih. moæe. 96 97 Vidi: Isto. ljudska priroda nije u potpunosti iskvarena. odgovora na izazove koje pruæa postmodernistiåko druãtvo.

H. Fairweather. Karl 1959. The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 2. M 1954.VA: John Knox Press. Lutheran Church St. The Humanity of God Richmond. John 1957. Emil 1953. Grand Rapids. Brunner. . F. Œakovo: Forum bogoslova. Nature and grace: Selections from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas Philadephia. Beograd: Biblioteka Obraz Svetaåki. N° 9 CITIRANA DELA Bloesh. T. Concordia Publishing House. Donald 1989. O stvaranju åoveka. The Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. MI. Bente and W. Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Grigorije Niski. Krãñanska antropologija. Philadelphia:The Westminster Press.90 Teoloãki åasopis. Barth. Courth. The Westiminster Press. Franc 1998. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 1. Sveti 2001. G. Bloesh. A. Louis. G. Dau 1921. Donald 1989. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest.

Teologija stvaranja.verujem. Beograd.org Romanidis. Beograd. Popoviñ. Zagreb. Popoviñ. Manastir Kelije.org Nemet. Praroditeljski greh. Jovan 2001. Tudoran. Serafim nd. Popadiñ. Herder & Herder. Justin 1980. Jasmin. Miliñ. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Rouz.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 91 Hanko. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 2. www. Novi Sad: Krãñanski centar „Dobroga Pastira“ i Teoloãki fakultet – Novi Sad. adresa: www. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Åovjek kao osoba. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 1. Marengo. . Dimitrije 2007. Herman. Scola. Zagreb. Van Baren 1976. Osijek. Isidor 2003. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Five Points of Calvinism Michigan. Prades 2003. Stanje åoveka pre i posle pada. Ladislav 2003. Justin 1980. Rahner. Åovekov Pad. Manastir Kelije. Novi Sad: Beseda. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Fundations of Christian Faith. New Ed. Kanoni sa sinode u Dorthrehtu 1618 – 1619.verujem. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Karl 1982.

92

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Ware, Kallistos 1979. The Orthodox Way New York, St Vladimirs Seminary Press. Pope, Hugh T. 1910. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. New York, Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Palmieri A. 1911. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI, New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Pope Pius XII 1950. Humani Generis: Encyclical of Popr Pius XII, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/ documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html Pope Poul VI 1965. Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral constitution n the church in the modern world, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/ archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_co ns_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html Waterworth, J. 1848. The Council of Trent: The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, London, Dolman.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

93

PECCATUM ORIGINALE – COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Resume:
There are considerable differencies related to understanding of the original sin in three major christian traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Romancatholic and Protestant. Eastern orthodox anthropology presumes that man did not lost ability of spiritual understanding after the fall, but Gods image (icon) still resides, although corrupted. Roman Catholic tradition insists that human nature is not totally corrupted although ability to do good is deeply weakened, but not completely lost. Although at first glance similar to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic anthropology differs significantly in terms of understanding human nature, mainly because of introduction of the concept donum superadditum. In contrast, prevailing Protestant view stands on pesimistic Augustiniane viewpoint of total depravity. Key words: original sin, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Sergej Beuk Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

95 UDK 22.08:230.11 Primljeno: 5.03.2010 Prihvañeno 10.5.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

OSNOVNE BIBLIJSKE VERE
U radu na temu povezanosti biblijske vere i æivota, autor pruæa moguñe odgovore na pitanja: ãta je religijska vera i koji su elementi biblijskog verskog koncepta? Promiãljajuñi o savremenosti kao o krizi verskog identiteta, rad nam donosi osnovne teoloãke premise hriãñanskog koncepta Boæije egzistencije u svetu kroz pojmove kao ãto su ’’opãta vera’’ i ’’dar vere’’, bez kojih nije moguñe prepoznati Boæiju prisutnost u i meœu ljudima. Takoœe, analizom teksta iz tradicionalnog reformisanog (kalvinistiåkog) dokumenta ’’Belgijskog veroispovedanja’’autor iznosi tezu da hristologija protestantsko – evanœeoskog tipa ima korene u teologiji Æana Kalvina i ostalih reformisanih mislilaca. Kljuåne reåi: Religija, Biblija, vera, Bog, Hristos, Sveti Duh, teologija darova, dar vere.

Uvod
Od kada postoji, ljudsko biñe stoji pred jednim od temeljnih pitanja egzistencije koje glasi: ko je Bog i ãta je religijska vera? Da li je to samo verovanje u natprirodno, nevidljivo i samodovoljno biñe ili se religijsko, kao specifiåno versko iskustvo, moæe konkretizovati? Zaãto postoje razliåiti religijski sistemi i da li svi svedoåe o istom fenomenu? Po åemu je Biblija drugaåija od drugih religijskih spisa?

96

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

U XIX, a naroåito u XX veku moæemo primetiti intelektualnu teænju za sintetizacijom (ili, bolje reñi, sinkretizacijom) razliåitih i åesto nespojivih religiskih sistema: od pojave teozofskog pokreta (kao formalne preteåe Nju Ejdæa), preko antropozofije, spiritizma i razliåitih tantriåkih kultova, pa do pokuãaja hinduizacije Zapada, kroz vaiãnizam – kriãnaizam, meditativne tehnike i jogu, razliåita panteistiåka i/ili pananteistiåka uåenja i intenzive prosvetljenja, savremeni åovek pokuãava da se izbavi iz krletke besmisla, alijenacije i smrti. Meœutim, da li smo posle svega na pragu odgovora? Da li smo sreñniji i bliæi istini? Da li je svet postao bolje mesto za æivot? Veñ dvadeset vekova Hristos poziva ljude na veru pokajanja i preumljenja; na promenu svesti srca i ljubav prema bliænjima reåima: ’’Evo stojim na vratima i kucam: ako ko åuje glas moj i otvori vrata, uñi ñu k njemu i veåerañu s njime, i on sa mnom.’’ (Otk. 3, 20) On åeka da mu otvorimo vrata i pozovemo na agape – gozbu, u sigurnosti iskrene i istinske biblijske vere.

Definicije religijske vere
Ako poœemo od najopãtije definicije da je religija ’’...odnos izmeœu nas i Biña izvan nas’’ (Everett, 2009: 10), onda religijska vera predstavlja specifiåan oblik poverenja/pouzdanja u Vrhovnu Realnost – u Boga ili bogove.1 U tom pravcu idu i sledeñe definicije religijske vere: ona je ’’...verovanje, razumevanje i oboæavanje Vrhovnog Uma i Volje koja usmerava Vaseljenu i odræava moralni odnos sa ljudima.’’ (Marlineau, 1888: 15). Moæemo primetiti da autor smatra da je religijska vera nemoguña bez kognitivnog i etiåkog aspekta, kojima se odgoneta Volja Tvorca i ostvaruje neraskidiv odnos sa tvorevinom. Ona je i voljno istraæivanje Istine,2 unutraãnji
1

Vidi: Schaff, Philip, New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1954.

2 Vidi: Hexham, Irving, Concise Dictionary of Religion, Regent College Press, Vancouver, 1999.

Espin. Kathryn and Marlan. preko lamaistiåkog budizma. dok bi sa druge.’’ (Nickoloff. naroåito internet.. istini koju ne sagledavamo sopstvenim razumom i iskustvom.obuhvata celokupan æivot koji je u odgovarajuñoj vezi sa Bogom. AltaMira Press. uviœamo koliko je naã zadatak teæak. Springer. 1851: 180). Lanham.. Za autora je vera svedoåanstvo drugog u kome se ona iznenada otvara za nas. ne zanemarujuñi istoriju religija. definicija religijske vere. to je stav åije prihvatanje nije motivisano bilo kakvim unutrasnjim dokazom. 2009. bez posebnog zahteva za razumskim i kritiåkim delovanjem. sa drugim ljudima i celom planetom. Vidi: Swatos. 1998. oseñanja i fenomena – od afriåkog fetiãizma.. niti razliåite kontekstualizacijske religijske forme verovanja.5 dok Hil. do islama. Madden. predstavlja temelj za miãljenje mnogih da je religioznost a priori iracionalna i samo mistiåka delatnost duha. New York. Iako u mnogo åemu prevaziœena. U ’’Enciklopoediji religije i druãtva’’ moæemo proåitati da je religijska vera sistem verovanja.4 Zakljuåujemo da religijska vera: ’’ . godine. prakse i kontinuiranog samoposmatranja koje se reflektuje na ponaãanje i stavove. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. razvija odnos sa tom stvarnoãñu i 3 4 Vidi: Encyclopedia Britannica. mora obuhvatiti razliåitost religijskih iskustava.. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. William. David. s jedne strane. pogotovu u smislu opãte sekularizacije kakva je danas na delu. bez stvarnog uåeãña misaonog. Ako tu dodamo i savremene komunikoloãke standarde i medije. Kniter i Madæets zakljuåuju da religijska vera:’’. ovako izneta. 5 . trebalo da se uhvati u koãtac sa postmodernim shvatanjem Svetog. Na ovom mestu preneo bih misao Åarlsa Buka iz 1851. koja veoma specifiåno opisuje problem definisanja religijske vere: ’’Vera je ona saglasnost koju dajemo neåijem predlogu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 97 stav i posebno uverenje3 koje podrazumeva transpersonalni odnos åiji je izvor u Bogu. Stanton. vec autoritetom ili svedoåenjem nekog drugog koji je otkriva ili se na nju poziva’’ (Buck.. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. uviœamo teãkoñu definisanja vere: ona. 2007. Vidi: Leeming. 2007: 445) I pored iznetog.nalazi svoju istinitost u ultimativnoj stvarnosti.

Ne smemo. Jeff. ãto podvlaåe Flinova i Tomasova: ’’ Religijska vera je jedinstven izbor verovanja u Boga i æivljenja u odnosu sa Njim’’ (Flynn. kao stalno aktuelan i aktivan princip. vera podrazumeva slobodu miãljenja i izbor æivotnog stava. dañemo i svoju definiciju religijske vere: ona je specifiåan oblik svesnosti koji podrazumeva veru u Boga. od uopãtavanja. 1997: 3). Freedom and Rationality.veñ ono ãto Bog o sebi objavljuje’’ (Lewis.6 Iako neiscrpna kao tema. po sebi. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 1995: 34). plod izabranja i posebnog 6 Vidi: Jordan. Takav Bog – milosrdan i svemoguñ – jeste poåetna taåka u razumevanju religijske vere Starog i Novog zaveta. Faith. Knitter.98 Teoloãki åasopis. Daniel.. Madges. . na æalost. kojom se Bog otkriva. Bogonadahnuti tekst Biblije zapoåinje æivot u okviru civilizacije s jednom jasnom namerom – ocrtavanjem ljudskom rodu Boæijeg plana spasenja koje se ostvaruje verom: ’’U Novom zavetu vera. u ovom trenutku. Howard – Snyder. religijska vera je neophodni i poåetni åinilac razumevanja fenomena religijskog (Svetog) u åoveku. Lanham. zaobiñi ni problem slobodne volje koja nalazi svoje mesto u verskom. koji se otkrio ljudskom rodu svojom logosnom prirodom kroz Sveto pismo. tako. time. druãtvu i istoriji. Biblija. obznanjuje i poziva: ’’Ne sme biti zaboravljeno da je za bibijsku veru krucijalno ne ono ãto o Bogu åovek govori. postaje Boæija jedinstvena objava. je predstavljena kao dar Svetog Duha. 1953: 113). a ne delo ljudske mudrosti. 1996. Definicije biblijske vere Biblijska vera je izraz koji se koristi za definisanje Svetopisamskog uåenja. apsolutni Kreator neba i zemlje i Odræavalac kreacije. odnosto. a posebno onih koje iznose Isus Hristos i Njegovi apostoli. Pateñi. Gospod je.. kao Tvorca ljudi i Univerzuma. Biblijski oblik religijske vere jeste spiritualna manifestacija Njegove Svevolje koja poseduje dve komponente: veru u Boga i veru u Njegovu Reå. N° 9 pokreñe ljude da prihvate naåin æivota koji proishodi iz takvog odnosa’’ (Hill. Thomas.

2. kojeg ne moæe biti bez jasnog sagledavanja Njegove volje kroz Reå i zato Hodæson naglaãava: ’’. Biblijska vera.. 1999: 307). odobravanje i liåno poverenje’’ (Grudem. Purswell. podrazumeva shvatanje poruke Pisma. 29). znanja i razumevanja’’ (Hodgson. Istine o Svetoj Trojici. 15. 4. Kao ãto moæemo razumeti. vera nije moguña i da znanje mora pratiti odreœeno oseñanje. Vrste biblijske vere Iako postoji mnogo razliåitih podela. usinovljenju. Spasavajuña vera usmerena je na iskupljujuñu ærtvu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda i Spasitelja.3). Doktrinarna ili opãta vera se odnosi na osnovna uåenja Svetog pisma i predstavlja polaziãte svih daljih versko – teoloãkih razmatranja. doktrinarna vera. crkvi i sl. kako vidimo. Ona je potpuno poverenje u .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 99 otkrivenja koje ljudsko srce nije samo osmislilo’’ (Berkhof. Ona je uvek individualno fokusirana na Svetog Sina i Njegovo Boæansko delo na zemlji (Dl. spasavajuña vera. 6). 2001: 19). Ona je i poåetak biblijski usmerenog æivota. 5. potvrda Boæije promisli i naåin soterioloãkog ostvarivanja.. Opravdavajuña vera poåiva na uverenju da je Bog pravedan. ali da li je to dovoljno? Grudem i Parsvel odgovaraju: ’’Prava spasavajuña vera ukljuåuje znanje. 3. posveñenja i ljubavi. Posredniåka vera podrazumeva sposobnost razumevanja Boæanskog delovanja u nama. Jasno je da bez izraæene emotivistiåke crte.vera je vrsta miãljenja. spasenju. 1. 1979: 1). biblijska vera nije samo postignuñe ljudskog biña koje traga za Bogom. veñ primarno Boæiji neposredovani akt u bogotragaocu koji je spreman za primanje takvog milosrdnog poklona. mi ñemo se u tekstu ograniåiti na osnovne vrste vere koje moæemo nañi u Svetom pismu: 1. ali i da je vernik opravdan pred Njim i Njegovom svetom voljom. Pravednost Boæija se odnosi na sve izabrane vernike i ne zavisi od ljudskih æelja ili htenja (Post. dnevna vera i 6 dar vere. koje se sastoji od pouzdanja. 1. posredniåka vera. jesu elementi doktrinarne vere bez kojih hriãñanstvo uopãte ne bi bilo moguñe (Jd. opravdavajuña vera.

20). mi otkrivamo sve ãto je Bog o sebi dozvolio da se spozna. kroz Reå. Prouåavajuñi Sveto pismo.100 Teoloãki åasopis. kao izvora Pravde. otkrio Sebe svetu. stalna pouzdanost u Boæiju prisutnost i voœstvo. kao i zakljuåci koje moæemo izvesti7: 1. ãto je krucijalno. iz kojih proishode svi ostali elementi vere i potpunog poverenja. 10. N° 9 izbavljajuñu snagu Gospoda. kroz Logos – Sina. 11. veñ i za ãirenje same crkve kroz evangelizaciju i misiologiju (Jev. 11). 5. Znanje o Bogu utvrœuje veru Naãa spoznaja Istine. ne samo za pojedince koji svedoåe o svom daru. 10. 1 – 3). 2. On je.greatbiblestudy. dovodi nas do Boga. Dnevna vera ukazuje na neophodnost permanentnog verovanja u Boga i Njegovu Silu.php . tako da mu se liånost u potpunosti predaje u poverenju i ljubavi (Gal. ka ljudskom biñu. dopustivãi mu da se obrati i iskupi (Rim. 2. 7). Jasno je da biblijska vera sadræi dva elementarna principa: a) veru u Njegovu volju i b) veru u Njegova obeñanja. ali i to biñe odgovara liånom verom svom Tvorcu. Iako Boæija suãtina ostaje skrivena. Vera u Boga utvrœuje pouzdanje Vera je uvek odnos – od Boga. 23). 7 Vidi: http://www. milost i ærtvu nije moguñe razumeti biblijski oblik vere.com/biblical_faith. Dar vere moæemo razumeti samo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. kroz ceo æivot i u svakom trenutku (Jev. Ona obuhvata svakodnevno usmerenje na razvijanje nove hristocentriåne svesti koja nam ukazuje na dnevnu Boæiju prisutnost (II Kor. Bez pouzdanja u Njegovu promisao. ãto znaåi da je to jedan od osnovnih darova koje Bog daje crkvi na proslavljenje. Ta vera je jasna.

Ta se ljubav uvek odnosi na Boga i Isusa Hrista. veñ naåin egzistencije iz svesti novog duha i oåiãñenog srca (I Kor. åak. u celini moæemo nazvati ’’darovima sluæbe’’ ili joã preciznije ’’darovima sluæenja’’ svima kojima je to sluæenje potrebno. i izabrani) i . koji je usklaœen sa tipom liånosti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 101 3. veñ zbog opãteg dobra. 1964: 87). i nada. Stot daje opãtu definiciju darova Duha: ’’Duhovni darovi su odreœeni kapaciteti dodeljeni po blagodati Boæijoj i kroz Njegovu snagu. Pouzdanje u Boga utvrœuje ljubav Sveto pismo na mnogo mesta ponavlja da vera pokazuje svoj efekat samo ako je bazirana na ljubavi. a koji odgovaraju odreœenim ljudima i njihovim sluæbama’’ (Stott. 1976: 132). sve moæe. Autor koristi termin ’’kapaciteti’’ da bi naglasio pouzdanost i volumen odreœenog dara. episkop Amfilohije. ali je svuda prisutan. automatski. ãto znaåi da Duhovne darove. i ljubav. ali i velika misterija pred svakim biñem koje teæi odgonetanju osnovnih istina æivota i smrti: ’’Prava vera je vera u jednoga Boga u Trojici. Iz svega iznetog uviœamo teãkoñu precizne analize vrsta biblijske vere. naravno. Flin potvrœuje: ’’Dar bih opisao kao posebnu kvalifikaciju odobrenu od strane [Svetog] Duha svakom verniku za osposobljavanje sluæenja u okviru Tela Hristovog’’ (Flynn. ãto je. ne ni za liåni duhovni razvoj. ali i odgovornoãñu koja svaka sluæba u crkvi sa sobom nosi. nije samo oseñanje. po Pismu. sve vidi. iz åega sledi da svi verujuñi mogu biti nosioci darova (åime ne postaju.. On je Duh koji se ne vidi. o svemu brine. sve zna.’’ (Snyder. Snajder se nadovezuje: ’’Duhovni darovi su dati ne samo za liåno uæivanje. Ljubav. Bog je Biñe bez poåetka i bez kraja. vaæno. Dar vere Ako pokuãamo da versko odgonetnemo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. onda je upravo dar vere jedan od osnovnih aktualizacija Treñeg Lica Trojice u biñu verujuñih. 13). dok kroz odnos sa bliænjima pokazujemo pozitivan stav prema celokupnoj tvorevini.. primarno. i æivot. Bog je pun ljubavi prema svim ljudima i svima stvorenjima’’ (Episkop Danilo. Tvorca neba i zemlje i svega vidljivog i nevidljivog. 1974: 20). 1996: 3). ona je i poverenje.

naveli bismo samo tri: a) usmerenost. rastu i utvrœivanju crkve i evangelizaciji sveta. Dar vere. Moæemo zakljuåiti da su darovi Svetog Duha kompleks razliåitih sposobnosti koji sluæe razvoju crkve i svih njenih vernika. i dara vere. moæemo posmatrati i kroz tri aspekta. Navedeni aspekt dara Duha uvek je okrenut ka spolja – ka zajednici. Pored mnogih faktora po kojima se Dar prepoznaje. 1934. okrenut ka unutra – ka pojedincu sa posebnom idejom i doæivljajem i neophodan je. Interventni aspekt podrazumeva specifiåan oblik uvida i snage da se preduprede ili suzbiju krize u crkvi. a koje moæemo oznaåiti kao instrumentalni. koristeñi svaki resurs radi ostvarivanja odreœenog plana. niti bi takav dar bio platforma za razumevanje ostalih darova Svetog Duha. po sebi. Ako bismo svoju paænju okrenuli ka daru vere. Harold. Vizionarski aspekt je intristiåan. dar vere moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu sposobnost åiji je izvor u Svetom Duhu i sluæi samoizgradnji verujuñih. 8 Vidi: Horton. ka prisutnim vernicima i podrazumeva se u pastoralnoj sluæbi. Instrumentalni aspekt dara vere odnosi se. kao instrumentalizacije Boæije promisli8: hriãñansku ili opãtu veru moæemo razumeti kao izraz Boæije ljubavi i prisutnosti u æivotu ljudi. joã na poåetku moramo napraviti jasnu distinkciju izmeœu hriãñanske vere. Assembly of God Publishing House. Navedeni aspekt se pojavljuje samo u situacijama kada postoji konkretna pretnja po zajednicu i on je neophodan element svih sluæbi u crkvi. vizionarski i interventni.102 Teoloãki åasopis. a elementi su: Biblija. prvenstveno. molitve. . propoved. Nottingham. dar vere ne bi bio prepoznat ni blagosloven. slavljenje i sl. Uzimajuñi reåeno u obzir. Vizionarski aspekt usmeren je na osobe koje imaju moguñnost da sagledaju buduñe potrebe crkve. Dar vere. dok je dar vere specifiåan. The Gifts of the Spirit. Bez njih. ali i baziåan dar Svetog Duha koji deluje na opãtem. N° 9 svi mogu doprinositi razvoju crkve. socijalno – eklisijalnom planu. b) pouzdanost i c) izvesnost. tako i za dijakonijsku sluæbu. koji su jednako vaæni. kako za pastoralnu. takoœe. na veru kao instrument sluæenja.

i Baynard.9 U svom 22. Tordinci. jer nam prepuãta sve zasluge i sva sveta dela koja je uåinio za nas i umesto nas. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. 10 . Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. reñi da Hristos nije dovoljan. a vera je sredstvo koje nas dræi u zajednici s Njim i svim Njegovim dobroåinstvima. Stoga. poãteno govoreñi. 2008. Pravednost vere u ’’Confessio Belgica’’ (1561. moæemo reñi da smo opravdani samo ’verom’ ili verom ’bez vrãenja Zakona’ (Rim. Chuck Baynard. veñ je ona samo sredstvo kojim prigrljujemo Hrista. naãu pravednost. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Zato.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 103 tako. 28). Prevedeno i prireœeno prema: ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. Dakle. A Isus Hristos je naãa pravednost. moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu intervenciju u sistemu Boæijeg plana. ålanu koji nosi naslov ’’Pravednost vere’’ moæemo proåitati10: ’’Verujemo kako na sledeñi naåin spoznajemo ove velike tajne: Sveti Duh nam u srcu pali plamen istinske vere koja prihvata Isusa Hrista sa svim Njegovim zaslugama. s Pavlom. koja za cilj ima stvaranje spiritualnih potencija za razvoj naroda Boæijeg. ne mislimo da je samo vera ta koja nas opravdava. jer bi to znaåilo da je Isus Hrist samo napola Spasitelj. Ali.) Doktrinarni dokument ’’Belgijsko veroispovedanje’’ predstavlja najstariji i najznaåajniji izraz teoloãke misli Reformisanih crkava Evrope i sveta. Tordinci. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. 3. te da ne traæi niãta ãto je izvan Njega. neizostavno sledi – ili u Hristu ne nalazimo sve ãto nam je potrebno za spasenje ili je sve potrebno u Njemu. veñ da je i neãto drugo potrebno za spasenje je najveñe bogohuljenje. Kada ta 9 Za viãe informacija vidi Predgovor dr Jasmina Miliña u ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. onaj koji ima Hrista po veri. 2008. åineñi da naãe srce postaje Njegovo. U sluåaju poslednjeg. 2008. s pravom. Chuck. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. u potpunosti je spasen.

Zakljuåak Nezahvalno je iznositi zakljuåak na temu biblijske vere. i dokazivanje onog ãto ne vidimo. pak. 11. tvrdo åekanje onog åemu se nadamo. ona zauzima sve mentalne kapacitete i podrazumeva ceo æivot – od svakodnevnih misli i odluka.. ali i tek zapoået. Vera je pozvanost i povezanost. naglaãavajuñi hristocentriåno versko usmerenje. a svoje svedoåanstvo nalazi kroz dobroåinstvo. pali se æar predanosti åiji je nedvosmislen izraz vera u Mesiju kao Spasitelja ljudi. a vera u Njega putovanje do u izvesnost spasenja. tako da slobodno moæemo govoriti o korenima razumevanja uloge i znaåaja Isusa Hrista upravo kroz dela Æana Kalvina i dokumente reformisanih/prezviterijanskih crkava. Vera u iskupiteljsku ærtvu na krstu dovoljna je za veåni æivot. N° 9 dobroåinstva postanu naãa. æiva realnost koju je moguñe ostvariti i koja se dostiæe u srcu i umu bogotraæitelja.. Istaknimo joã neãto: sve tradicionalne protestantske i evanœeoske crkve prate izneti teoloãki credo. 1).104 Teoloãki åasopis. ’’ . Moæemo napisati tomove knjiga o biblijskoj veri. Hristos ili jeste. ona su viãe nego dovoljna da nas razreãe naãeg greha. (Jev. zatvorimo oåi i zakoraåimo. a moæda. åime soterioloãki put biva osiguran. poverenje u ljubav koju gaji Otac prema svojoj deci. Posredstvom Svetog Duha. Zato. Hristos nas je pozvao da ga sledimo i tome ne moæemo niãta dodati. iznad svega. ali tako ãto prihvatamo i uranjamo u Hrista. ali moæemo se i prepustiti reåima apostola Pavla: ’’Vera je.’’ Jasno je da reformisana (kalvinistiåka) teologija svoje korene vidi iskljuåivo u Pismu koje potvrœuje nebesku ulogu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda. vera je sredstvo koje nas odræava u zajednici sa Gospodom. Dakle. ili nije i tu ne moæe biti sredine! Tako. istrajnost i trpeljivost. i svaka sumnja u tu istinu iskljuåuje nas iz kruga izabranih. pravednost i ljubav. do potpune predanosti Bogu. a po volji Svetog Oca. Ta izvesnost je konkretna. verom. niti oduzeti – On je put. postajemo opravdani verom.

gift of faith. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Christian Faith.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 105 Summary In this paper. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. belief. God. Christ. Chuck Baynard. Berkhof. Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje. 1979. by analyzing the text from the traditional reformed (Calvinist) document ’’Belgian confession’’ author introduces the thesis that Christology of protestant-evangelical type has roots in the theology of Jean Calvin and other reformed thinkers. Also. Chuck. . 2008. the work brings us the basic premise of the Christian theological concept of Gods existence in the world through terms such as ’’general faith’’ and the ’’gift of faith’’. which basis is connection between biblical faith and life. Wm. CITIRANA DELA: Baynard. Key words: Religion. Grand Rapids. Tordinci. 2008. author is providing possible answers on the following questions: what is religious faith and which are the elements of biblical belief concept? Considering actuality as a form of crisis of religious identity. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Hendrikus. B.. Holy Spirit. theology of gifts. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. Bible. without which it is not possible to recognize Gods presence in and among people.

Philadelphia. Charleston. Wayne. 1999. 1995. Religion and Theology. Peter. 1851. Flynn. Hodgson. Lanham. Sremski Karlovci.106 Teoloãki åasopis. Thomas. Flynn. Vanc couver. 1999. Mystic. 2001. Jeff. Gloria. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Wheaton. Grudem. Faith. 1997. Louisville. Concise Dictionary of Religion. Nema lepãe vere od hriãñanske. Bible Doctrine. A Theological Dictionary. Twenty – Third Publications. Srpska pravoslavna Eparhija sremska. Grand Rapids. 19 Gifts of the Spirit. 1996. Biblio Life. Zondervan. Christian Faith. 2009. Episkop Danilo. episkop Amfilohije. Knitter. Everett. Charles. Hill. Irving. Living Faith. Westminster John Knox Press. 2007. Crissy & Markley. William. N° 9 Buck. The psychological elements of religious faith. Encyclopedia Britannica. Hexham. . Paul and Madges. Purswell. Victor Books. Eileen. Brennan. Leslie. Carroll. Regent College Press. 1974. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Charles.

1964. London. The Problem of Wine Skins. Espin. 2007. Stott. izdavaå nepoznat. Westminster Press. 1998. New York. New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge. Swatos. 2009. Madden. David.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 107 Horton. Nottingham. The Gifts of the Spirit. Leeming. Lanham. Stanton. Edwin. Liturgical Press. 1934. Grand Rapids. Baker Book House. Inter – Varsity Press. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. 1888. Assembly of God Publishing House. John. . Nickoloff. Orlando. Kathryn and Marlan. Schaff. Howard. 1953. Collegeville. Springer. Downers Grove. A Study of Religion. James. 1954. Baptism and Fullness. Inter – Varsity Press. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. William. James. 1976. Snyder. Marlineau. Lewis. Harold. AltaMira Press. Philip. An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. The Biblical Faith and Christian Freedom. Downers Grove. Philadelphia.

God talk. The confrontation with this critical approach to theology eventually culminated in an intellectual and personal crisis. Under the Line It was during my studies that I first became acquainted with what is known as ‘the religious scientific critique of God and theology’. a popular approach to religious studies today.2010 Originalni nauåni rad Speaking of God Key words: theology.04.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet By Csongor –Szabolcs Bene 109 UDK 211:215 Primljeno: 01. theology is not only possible as God talk but also justified. I was faced with the challenge to rethink and to reevaluate the theological assumptions that I had become accustomed to and that I had. In this article the author explores the differences between theology and religious studies by focusing on the theology of God. God talk when compared to the demands of modern scientific theory it seems that it is impossible. revelation. rationality. theology of God. The crisis is best described in terms of a challenge. the identity of God. religious studies. to a certain degree. . biblical theology. taken for granted. But we see this as no reason to abandon theology as God talk. philosophy of science.2010 Prihvañeno: 05. rather by focusing on a biblical theological understanding of the identity of God.04. The main argument is that theology is in essence God talk and specifically talk about the identity of God in contrast to religious studies where God is talked about in terms of a human projection.

In the scientific community the researcher of religion must take the position of methodical atheism. The second assumption is related to the first: because religion is objectively analyzed. at the bottom of the board. since its analysis is objective. in philosophical terms the physical and the metaphysical.110 Teoloãki åasopis. a couple of matchstick figures were drawn. This ultimately means that all that there is above the line is out of reach. God is posited above the all-dividing line between the physical and the metaphysical. as the one who provides access to God. The arrow. unidentified and. God exists as an undefined. which guarantees scientific objectivity. the scientific approach presupposes certain similarities between human religious experiences. God was thus part of all that is metaphysical. The matchstick figures symbolized the major religions in the world today: Christianity. closest to the all-dividing line between humanity and God. Buddhism and Hinduism. The one engaged in the study of religions must not be biased by any of the religions under consideration. a line was drawn. All that there is under the line is what matters. Above the line. Above these figures. The fourth assumption is that the religious experience is a one-sided affair. These indicated that all religions have a certain ‘holy book’ that contains their teachings. books were drawn. The drawing is based on certain assumptions about the reality of the religious experience and the consequent scientific analysis of it. Islam. points only in one direction. the name was written of a key figure. on a second row. they all have a holy book. The third assumption has to do with what is above the line: God. which indicates the dynamics of the religious experience. from the respective religion. Above the books. The line on the white board indicated the divide between the natural and the supernatural. and humans of all that is physical. Judaism. N° 9 The argumentation in class went like this: on a white-board. The first assumption is that this image of religions today is the most scientifically responsible. after all. by consequence unhistorical entity. under the line. On a fundamental level this means that the line cannot be crossed either way. The ul- . From an objective and uninvolved perspective all religious experiences seem quite similar. an exceptional figure and a God. from bottom up. above the line the word God was posited.

In history. ever-present etc. The irony is that this divine being is on the one hand unidentified. God is a projection of the human mind. does not do justice to the Christian theological talk of God. In the face of this criticism I. i. God is a generic term. But ultimately this God has its home in the human consciousness and ability to project a superior higher being. As a Christian theologian. This is precisely the underlying principle. It is no longer a talk about God as such.e. everything beyond that line is a projection and in the final analysis non-existent. but talk of the religious feelings of human beings. from a religious-scientific (Religionswissenschaftlich) perspective. no people and no places. has a history. This implies the obvious conclusion: God is not an entity on its own but just another faculty of the human imagination. God is . theology. all-knowing. in terms of divinity. which stands for ‘a being up there’. It is evident that from a Christian theological perspective there are some problems with the above-mentioned critical approach. What I am about to challenge in this article is the religious scientific approach to theology specifically its ‘generic conception of God’ in terms of ‘the highest divine being’. The reason is that. God has acted at given times and in certain places to a specific group of people. mute being who is decorated with superlatives. I was familiar with the fact that theologians talk about God as a well-identified entity. as a theologian. So God is well identified through the stories told by his people through the ages. have been asking the following question: what about the identity of God? From a Christian theological perspective. God is not just a general concept. and on the other well described by abstract definitions like all-powerful. can be identified. I am challenged to consider the possibility of theology as talk about God. Since human consciousness is bound to all that is under the line. but it is intrinsically bound to the projections of the human mind. taking into account the above criticism. which is at the heart of the modern criticism of theology as a discipline. In post-Kantian terminology. but has a Name. The heart of the problem is that a nonspecific conception of God.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 111 timate assumption is that the Divine is not an entity on its own. It is a God with no history. can be called upon and thus. faceless. God is defined as a distant.

Charlesworth. By making explicit what I understand theology to be. theology is a discipline by which the believers seek to express their beliefs in a reasonable and ordered way. songs. Definitions often carry within them the unspoken presuppositions which lie at the heart of one’s theological work. to a certain 1 St.112 Teoloãki åasopis. Anselm of Canterbury’s classic formulation. What is Theology? Beyond a personal motivation lies also a certain understanding of what the discipline of theology is. Proslogion: with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. meeting people. fides quaerens intellectum. God has an identity. According to the anselmian formula. consequently the identity of God. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. We will present our definition of theology alongside these definitions. . The consequent stories. laws. which is still popular and much appreciated by theologians.J. It is this theological understanding of God that does not match the modern scientific perspective of the divine. Theology then is a process of rationalization of the believer’s faith experiences. it is wise to first look at some well-known definitions by representative theologians through the various ages of Christian theology. “faith seeking understanding”1 is one of the most well known definitions of theology. It is a classic definition. will also become more evident. as a way of showing our specific take on the matter. N° 9 talked about in terms of appearing. Anselm. 1965). Here the identity of God has to do with a biblical theological understanding of who God is and how that understanding helps us to address the problems of a religious-scientific approach to theology in general and to the theology of God. wisdom sayings and testimonies document Gods history with these people. speaking to them and acting in their lives. These experiences are related to a certain tradition. In order to understand what Christian theology is. translated with an introduction and philosophical commentary by M.

Theology moved.2 and also elucidated the content of faith with regard to beliefs that were contrary to the Credo. community and talk. from the Church into the university. which ought to be taught in an academic setting? If theology is strictly related to the Church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 113 community and to the individual person. and specifically with the God-human relationship. the character of theology has been mostly shaped by its position within the gap between church and university. then what defines its content and aims and what is its relevance to the life of the Church? Thus far. D. With the emergence of scholasticism came also the uprooting of theology as a Church discipline. mainly on talking about God’s being in light of the challenges presented by the critics of the Christian faith.3 In modernity. 3 See.” in NDT. are all important aspects in one’s definition of what the discipline of theology entails. as it were.. Theology became more of a system of thought. Wright. This break is significant for the way theology is understood today. Theology during this early period was fully a church discipline that belonged to the community of faith. “Theology. a subject taught in the academia. Rationality. a scientific discipline. and by consequence. Questions are often raised as one inquires about modern theology: is theology a discipline restricted to the life of the Church or is it a public discipline (meaning apart from the Church). Theology was a multifaceted discipline that gave a rational synthesis of the Church’s Credos. with a strict demarcation be2 By Credo we mean the theological and confessional achievements of the various Councils of the Church roughly before 400 AD. . 680. one could talk about a separate development in modernity. faith. in their theology.F. then what is its public relevance? If theology is a matter of public interest. In the Middle Ages a certain shift took place in the way theology was understood. The early church fathers focused. This faith was hallmarked by the scandalous claim that God had become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. Most theological works were dealing with the problems related Christology. experience.

141.. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. H.. The definitions of the modern period are marked by the struggle to precisely define theology as a discipline. How shall we get it across. (Oxford: Oxford University Press. nd . 1. 5. The following classic definitions are reminiscent of this very ambiguity.. The church’s specific enterprise of thought is devoted to the question.W.. 32. An Introduction.114 Teoloãki åasopis.”5 “…theology is the thinking internal task of speaking the gospel. Modern theologians often seek to bridge this gap. S. R. between us and Him. N° 9 tween church theology and academic theology. On the one hand. 2002). Christelijk Geloof. 7 McGrath. 4 5 e Grenz.. they also have to deal with the relevance of academic theology for the life and practice of the Church. 1997). with signs other than linguistic – in the church called “sacrament” and “sacrifice” – or by other behavior of our community.”4 “Basically. systematic theology is the reflection on and the ordered articulation of faith. J. whether to humankind as message or to God in praise and petition – for of course the church speaks the gospel also to God. 8 druk (Kampen: Kok. The Triune God. 1997). “Theology: is the systematic reflection on the content of the relationship. (Oxford: Blackwell. vol. Christian Theology. which God in Jesus Christ has established. that Jesus is risen and what that means?”6 “Theology is reflection upon God whom Christians worship and adore.”7 Berkhof. A.E. in a language. 2000). while on the other hand. theologians try to show the relevance of theology for public matters. pleading it before him and praising him for it. 6 Jenson. Theology for the Community of God. Systematic Theology. 1. 2 Ed.

. New Edition. the Church. in the academy or in the public square. 2002). theology is broadly defined in modernity as a discipline.e. To talk about God does 8 9 Barth. God.God and ‘logos’ . (Nijkerk: Callenbach. theology is understood and defined as an intellectual discipline. related in its aims and tasks to the theologian who reflects on the content of his faith. by implication. 10 The word theology is the convergence the two Greek words ‘theos’. A. the content of faith. the content of theology. theology happens in relationship with a faith community. Van de Beek.10 rather.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 115 “Now the matter. Theology is ultimately related to the church in an essential way. This is not a mere translation of the Greek rendering of theos – logos. theology. K. for it finds its roots and ends in her. The basic premise of our definition is that the task of theology is to talk about God. Second. there are some common features that unite them: first. Theology in other words is talk about God. in community with others. It may be in the church. i. But the context in which theological reflection and speaking happens may vary. 1982). The theologian’s task is to reflect on and to speak about the content of faith.word of or about God. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. is critical and systematic reflection of the presupposition of the Church’s ministry of witness. but also about God himself. In short. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. Third. (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. God kennen – met God leven. it is the classic understanding of what the exercise of theological work entails.”9 Beyond the ambiguity of these definitions. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982.. i.”8 “…Theology is about the knowledge of God.e. 2. is God Himself in his dealings with the world and the ensuing good message of His works. and. The ancient Greek philosophers used this . However it is not only about the human ideas about God or the human religious feelings of human beings.

God is not a general term for some abstract ‘high being’. To talk about God and the identity of God is to talk about the God who is identified in and through the Biblical narratives. the Church through the ages. In the standard post-enlightenment theologies. On a fundamental level. . This is not only an individualistic endeavor.e. This can be traced to the all-defining question of the Enlightenment: how do you know what you know? Most modern theologians struggled to definition for all teachings about metaphysics. but also to the broader meaning of what talk means. a discourse in verbal and nonverbal forms. The identity of God implies the actual presence of God in history. but the contrary is true. N° 9 not only refer to the act of utterance itself. To formulate this in a question: who is this God. This critical note implies that theology is more than just talk about God. The identity of God also implies that God is identified by a Name. about whom we as theologians talk? Initially the answer to the question might seem obvious. The above definition of theology might be considered a narrow representation of what the task of theology might entail in its totality. namely talk about God. To talk about the identity of God is to talk about a God who is identified by specific events in time and space.116 Teoloãki åasopis. It implies a certain way of talking about God. To talk about God is to talk about the identity of God. Here we focus on this one aspect of theology.e. but also a communal act that takes place in the context of a certain faith community. our question about the identity of God is a departure from the kind of theological prolegomena developed during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. because in a certain sense. i. It is right. i. it became related specifically to the sum of the teachings about God in the Christian tradition. Theology is an articulated exteriorization of the theologian’s experiences related to God. and can also be addressed. Therefore the understanding that theology is talk about God is central and directive here. theology is also talk about the world and humanity. Later. in Christian thinking. the most fundamental question the theologian had to answer was an epistemological question.

to replace the epistemological question how do you know? with the question who is God? Is it fundamentally possible to ask a different question and receive a different answer? In actuality this is a turn from an epistemological towards a theological foundation and understanding of theology. . Ethics and Encyclopedia of Theology at the University of Leiden. Part of understanding the problem of modern theology is to define as clearly as possible what the problem actually is. Our critical observation considering this shift is this: the kind of question one asks influences the kind of answer one receives.11 His over-all work is an outstanding exposition concerning the problems of twentieth century theology. The question we want to ask here is this: is it possible. In a way this is a different starting point than that of the classic post-Enlightenment prolegomena marked by epistemology.J. Thus Adriaanse’s 11 He has been the professor of Philosophy of Religion. in theology. Epistemological Criticism of Theology At the tail-end of the twentieth century the general feel in the field of theology was that the talk of God was not only problematic but also impossible. we have identified the work of the Dutch theologian H. Adriaanse. Theology in the post-enlightenment era was no longer about God as such but much more about whether or not it is possible for humans to understand anything about God.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 117 justify their theologies concerning this very question. from 1979 until his retirement in 2001. To ask the question who is God? is to ask about the identity of God. What essentially happened was that the epistemological question became the fundamental question for theology. To avoid the risk of entering into a meta discussion of the subject.

The work of Adriaanse is intrinsically connected to the developments of the philosophy of science in general. From a systematic perspective we will see Adriaanse’s definition of what constitutes a valid theory of knowledge in its relationship to modern scientific method. In it we will be able to formally analyze Adriaanse’s conception of experience. We will approach Adriaanse’s argument from three different perspectives: historical. rather we use it to refer to the theological era which spans from the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the end of the twentieth century. the word modern in this context is not used in the sense of contemporary or today. See O’Hear’s assessment of Poppers importance in the field of the philosophy of science: “Large claims are made for Popper by his admirers. Conjectures is the guide by which 12 For clarity’ sake. The order of knowledge is subject to historical processes. and is seen by some as the bearer in . N° 9 work provides the vocabulary and the conceptual framework for our analysis of modern theology. Popper. 1963). He is frequently compared with Kant. 13 K.12 The Established Order of Knowing One of Adriaanse’s main arguments is that there is a certain order by which it can be established how and what one knows. Conjectures and Refutations. knowledge and rationality. (London: Routledge. formal and systematic. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. After the historical considerations we will look at some of the formal aspects of the established order of knowing. Therefore it is important to shortly trace these developments.R. Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations 13 is an excellent introduction to the history of the philosophy of science.118 Teoloãki åasopis. Modern: in the sense that it deals with the core of Enlightenment ideology. What today is accepted as valid knowledge can be traced in the history of philosophy of science. The historical overview provides us with a broader perspective on the issues Adriaanse raises and also clearly defines his position in the field.

we should abandon them.) Karl Popper. that is what we should do: test our theories empirically against the predications which follow from them. and devise a new theory to account for the data – and it is worth underlining here that Popper sees the forming of theories as a matter of imaginative conjecture. what was considered science. 3-6. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers.” A. Adriaanse often notes that changes in scientific theory have had great influence on theology. Popper presents the fifteenth and sixteenth century tendencies through the juxtaposition of two representative philosophers: Bacon and Descartes. he is a believer in reason and in the power of reason to solve our problems. and its ensuing age of rationalism. and see if they survive. Kant’s Critique. in Conjectures. 14 Popper.14 Throughout history. “Popper’s philosophy of science is marked by a deep hostility to any profession of certainty or attempt to claim justification for one’s theories. vol. traces the history and development of the theory of science from an epistemological perspective. . 2004). but also the method of acquiring knowledge. After that he continues with the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the impact Kant had on the philosophy of science.” His main contribution has been to the philosophy of science. (London: Routledge.1. that is. As falsifying our theories is the one thing we can do effectively in science. O’Hear (ed. and abandoning any futile at verification or justification. Modern theology is mainly characterized by the influence of Enlightenment rationality. on the whole and that theology has struggled to define itself in accorthe twentieth century of the Kanitan torch. Popper’s treatment of Kant offers us keen insights into the shape of the scientific theory during the eighteenth century. If they do not. and the shape of theology in the twentieth century.” “Popper’s philosophy of science involves putting falsification center stage. the Middle Ages and the Enlightenment. In it we find a certain correlation between. Not only what constitutes knowledge has gone through changes. meaning: how do we know what we know? has gone through a series of changes. as a discipline. Both the content and the method of knowledge are of interest here.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 119 we trace the main tendencies of two major periods in the philosophy of science.

which leads to doxa. False method. Bacon’s doctrine “might be described as the doctrine of the veritas Naturae. . for otherwise God would be deceiving us. N° 9 dance with the ever-developing findings of science. By following and contrasting these two. Popper. The second stream is classical rationalism (Descartes).16 Bacon further distinguishes between true and false Method. 7. Thus the truthfulness of God must make truth mani- 15 16 Popper. Adriaanse’s work is part of this wider framework and his critique of classic theology is embedded in this kind of rationalism.15 At the heart of this optimism is the presupposition that truth is manifest. on the other hand. or prejudice. “Descartes based his optimistic epistemology on the important theory of the veritas Dei. if not it may be uncovered by human beings. or superstition. is the anticipation of the mind. the truthfulness of Nature. Conjectures and Refutations. True method is none other than the true reading or interpretation of Nature that leads to true knowledge. by the most optimistic view of man’s power to discern truth and to acquire knowledge”. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is the intellectual intuition of clear and distinct ideas. The first stream of thought is classical empiricism (Bacon). episteme. in other words it may reveal itself. or conjecture or hypothesis. What we clearly and distinctly see to be true must indeed be true. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is observation. Popper leads us to the fundamental understanding of modern theories of science. 5. Popper follows two streams in the development of the English and the European theories of knowledge and science. Conjectures and Refutations. Nature is an open book.120 Teoloãki åasopis. The Reformation and Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth century brought about a certain “epistemological optimism. This very thought contributed to the birth of modern science. Only if his mind is poisoned by prejudice can he fall into error”. He who reads it with a pure mind cannot misread it.

not only in Descartes but also in Bacon’s form. Popper. 15. the senses and the intellect were the authorities. Popper elsewhere points out that this is none other than Kant’s principle of autonomy.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 121 fest”. all humans have the source of knowledge in them.e. i. in Popper’s opinion. the part which is the source of real knowledge (episteme). the part which is the source of our fallible opinions (doxa). remains essentially a religious doctrine in which the source of knowledge is divine authority”. anti-authoritarianism. Popper raises the critical question of whether they truly managed to rid themselves of their dependency on authority for their optimistic epistemologies. as divine authorities. Popper’s critical analysis shows that “Descartes’ method of systematic doubt is also fundamentally the same (as that of Bacon): it is a method of destroying all false prejudices of the mind.20 At stake here is the freedom of man to think. and a super-human part. and they set them up within each individual man. but it seems like the efforts of both Bacon and Descartes are an attack on prejudice and naiveté. which seemed to function. Conjectures and Refutations. Conjectures and Refutations. Thus we are split into a human part. in order to arrive at the unshakable basis of self-evident truth”. and which has an almost divine authority over us”. 19 New authorities have been erected: instead of Aristotle and the Bible. Conjectures and Refutations. 15.18 It may be somewhat strong to suggest. of our errors and of our ignorance. such as the senses or the intellect. 7. Popper critically concludes: “We can see more clearly why this epistemology. Popper. Popper. But in doing so they split man into two parts…. Most historians of philosophy agree that humanity has gone from the ‘darkness’ of the Middle Ages to the ‘light’ of the Enlightenment and Modernity.17. 17 18 19 20 Popper. However. “Bacon and Descartes set up observation and reason as new authorities.17 Both Bacon and Descartes agree that there is no need to appeal to a higher authority. Conjectures and Refutations. we ourselves. .

has had a major influence on contemporary theology. If it is a knowl21 22 Popper. Popper. A step beyond classical empiricism and rationalism is Popper’s treatment of the Enlightenment. Popper outlines two basic steps in the work of Kant. The kind of rationalism that has been defining the European mind-set. a step towards the liberation of the human intellect from any outside agency. the last couple of centuries. 175. 178.122 Teoloãki åasopis. It is thinking without being conditioned by outside authorities.”22 Kant’s definition clearly summarizes the basic program of the Enlightenment: the freedom of the individual human beings to think and to define reality for themselves. Conjectures and Refutations. The first step is the clear definition of the limits of knowledge. The contribution of this ‘rebellion’ was and still is the affirmation of the autonomous human being as the ultimate and true agent of knowledge. but to lack of courage or determination to use one’s own intelligence without the help of a leader. . This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment.21 The student of theology who wants to understand the shape of modern theology has to take into consideration the impact Kant’s thinking has had. not to lack of intelligence. Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence. Conjectures and Refutations. Kant. the Critique of Pure Reason. is the one who systematized the achievements of classical empiricism by declaring the independence of ‘pure reason’ in his major work. as the most prolific figure of this period. Nature or God. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed’ if it is due. Popper places the significance of Kant’s oeuvre alongside the American and French revolutions. Kant made the next step. N° 9 We understand this as humanity’s struggle for independent thinking. Where Bacon and Descartes were cautious. Popper’s analysis of Kant starts with a quote from Kant on the definition of Enlightenment: “[it is] the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage… of the incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. Kant’s work provided the intellectual backbone for the new era on the European continent.

but an inductive knowledge. Since the Middle Age there has been a gradual move towards the in23 24 25 Popper.25 Within the parameters of the Kantian understanding of Ethics. however. the human being becomes a free agent. Beyond that. Popper. in Popper’s analysis. as he had humanized science. but imposes its laws upon nature’”. The limits of the human intellect are determined by time and space. The theory of the free thinking human being crystallizes most evidently in Kant’s ethics. 181. because they precede Kant’s critique of religion. be applied to ordinary physical things and events. …The doctrine of autonomy . . Popper. but that the human being himself is the one who is the judge of the truth of an ethical demand. It is not a deductive knowledge anymore. is the humanization of knowledge. then the critical question is how far can that kind of knowledge or intellect reach? To answer the question one must look into Kant’s relevant ideas on time and space. Conjectures and Refutations. “Kant humanized ethics. Kant’s second step. Since knowledge is not found ‘out there’. as the ultimate basis of ethics”. however exalted. Popper’s survey of Kant and the two steps are important.24 In other words. Popper observes the following. Conjectures and Refutations. They can. i. this means that there is no outside authority. Human knowledge thus cannot reach beyond what is given in the world. projection. Kant turns the whole Cartesian understanding of the method of knowledge on its head. 179. Popper also notes that “in Kant’s own striking formulation of this view ‘our intellect does not draw its laws from nature. 180. He asserted that “our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole”23.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 123 edge freed from ‘authorities’. there is no certain knowledge only speculation. In Kant’s critique of religion. Popper explains “Kant wrote his Critique in order to establish that the limits of sense experience are the limits of all sound reasoning about the world”. but only in the human intellect. we see even more clearly the relevance of the above overview.e. Conjectures and Refutations.the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority.

who does not accept any ‘higher’ authority anymore. From the moral point of view… you even have to create your God. knowledge and rationality. N° 9 dependence of human consciousness and reason. 182.26 The freed human being has reached his/her own maturity by becoming the subject of his or her own history. The free human being.124 Teoloãki åasopis. The Enlightenment is the main paradigm which to a large extent defines contemporary scientific rationality. We turn our attention now to Adriaanse’s conception of experience. Experience. in order to worship him as your creator. is at the heart of modern theology. Kant provides the systematic basis on which this epistemological rationality rests. . For in whatever way the Deity should be made known to you. you must not condemn me for saying: every man created his God. Knowledge and Rationality The nineteenth and twentieth century theology is dominated by Descartes’s epistemological dictum ego cogito ergo sum. 26 Popper. This self-actualization is one of the main factors which determine the context of twentieth century theology. Conjectures and Refutations. Adriaanse’s critique of classic theology in rooted in this rationality. Popper highlights the following words from Kant: “much as my words may startle you. In our view. it is you… who must judge whether you are permitted [by your conscience] to believe in Him. these are the key loci that hold Adriaanse’s argument together. and to worship Him”. Through Popper’s review of the main tendencies in the philosophy of science we come to clearly understand the ideological context in which Adriaanse poses his critique of classic theology. but projects his or her own God. It is formulated more often as a question: how do you know what you know? In other words the certainty of knowledge had to be established in a rational way. and even… if He should reveal Himself to you. They are foundational to his critique of classic theology and his theory of religious education.

From the perspective of the receiver: in the act of revelation. In the problematisation of revelation.27 The usual theological locus where the issues related to experience. who reveals himself in situation (B) in its Gehalt (C) (content) for the recipient (D) with the effect (E). Theologically speaking we are dealing with Adriaanse’s theory of revelation. knowledge and rationality are discussed is the prolegomena of a theological work. for Adriaanse. 4 . from the author of revelation (A). is not only about the “how”. it becomes clear how Adriaanse thinks about the issues related to theological method and theological rationality. It is the place where theologians have to come to terms with the presuppositions of their theology in relation to the demands of the scientific theory. we want to present a common understanding of revelation in its formal and theological definitions. Rationality..28 The formal structure of revelation may be approached from on the one hand from the perspective of the author and on the other from the perspective of the recipient of revelation. In what follows. we will trace in Adriaanse’s work what he sees as the dominant factors on the field of experience. 28 Schwöbel. the recipient (D) gains an insight (E).J. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. Revelation as a theological locus is foundational for all systematic theologies. or the methodology of knowledge. II Religionphilosophisch” (RGG /VI) 464-467. He takes one step further and explores the possibilities and the validity of knowledge. “Offenbarung. C.. 1988) 7. From the perspective of: the author (A). (Kampen: Kok. of a certain Gehalt (C) (content). but struggled to adapt itself to the demands of science. in the revelatory situation (B). The predominant discussions in theology related to revelation are focused on the possibilities (or impossibilities) of what may 27 Adriaanse.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 125 We have already noted that theology did not develop in a vacuum. specifically to the various theories of knowledge. knowledge and rationality. H. But before we engage with Adriaanse’s problematisation of revelation.

this is the main challenge: can there be any genuine correlation between humans and God? The answer to this challenging question is twofold. is the content of revelation (C). In a nutshell. and at the same time. There was an obvious correlation between human intellect and divinely revealed knowledge. the presuppositions were more optimistic about the relationship between revelation and reason. and through which he enables life in faith as life in the certainty of truth (E). His will and His character. this is how the formal structure translates: Israel’s God. Thus God is not the projection of the human mind but the subject of revelation. however through the raising of the Crucified One his will for communion with. between reason and ‘otherworldly’ or ‘received’ knowledge? It is often assumed that the kind of knowledge that revelation provides and the nature of human reason are mutually exclusive. then what is the . and enables its execution (E). the almighty Creator (A). since the Reformation the focus has shifted mainly towards reason as the place of revelation. when revelation is seen as an act of self disclosure of God. through which he gives certainty about the truth to those who listen to this message (D). In theological terms. if there is any. The recipient of the revelation (D) understands his life situation (B) as brought to light by this act of revelation. His creatures. yes there is correlation between God and humans in the act of revelation. However.126 Teoloãki åasopis. manifests His character as Truthful Love (C). N° 9 or may not happen between the author and the recipient of the revelation. In the Middle Age. Firstly. reveals Himself. It is apparent from this definition that God is the author (A) of the revelatory act. makes the truth of the message certain. At stake here is the following critical question: what happens between the sender and the receiver in the act of revelation? What does the receiver ‘get’ or what does he come to know from or about the sender? Or to ask the same question differently: what is the difference. Secondly. (in Christ-atoned). Theologically revelation implies the disclosure of God to humans. in the apostle’s life situation marked by the apparent failure of the mission of Jesus (B). The dawn of the Enlightenment went beyond this and brought this traditional relationship of revelation and reason into a problematic relationship.

So talk of the ‘beyond’ does not have the character of time and space.D.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 127 human faculty that receives this act? In other words: when God reveals himself where does revelation land in the human consciousness? These critical questions shed light on the problems of human rationality and the knowledge of God. K. but only the thinking and feeling of human beings. (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. By consequence the line blurred between God and humans. 30 Barth. ‘God’ is a product of human consciousness and it is ultimately bound to it.. Schleiermacher sought to define revelation in terms of the human consciousness as “the feeling of absolute dependence”.E.]. As the recipient of revelation humans are unable to think of or know God. Finite humans are confined to time and space (classic Kantianism) and therefore they cannot reach beyond what is given in time and space. There was no distinct subject and object relationship. vol I.29 thus identifying the human intellect and emotion as place where the revelation of God landed. He rather focused on the true subject of revelation.[reprint of the 1831 ed. Both theologians answered these questions in their own way.30 Barth in a certain sense refused to locate the act of revelation in the human. Barth on the other hand sought to reaffirm the otherness of God and thus distinguished the subjectivity of human consciousness from the objectivity of God. Barth’s conclusion was then that without revelation there is no correlation possible whatsoever between God and humans. 2003). . God. F. One of the most significant examples of these issues is the discussions about the theologies of Schleiermacher and Barth. (Berlin: De Gruyter. His assumption is that there is no correlation between God and human beings. 1932-1938). Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. Furthermore this means that the possibility of conceiving God as an entity on its own is impossible. These theological and philosophical considerations are at the basis of Adriaanse’s rejection of the classic understanding of revelation.. and therefore 29 Schleiermacher.

public.128 Teoloãki åasopis. First. This will help us to understand Adriaanse’s objections against classic theology. we have to see how Adriaanse defines a scientific theory. . can one still rationally justify. We have to examine at this point the two aspects of the scientific method Adriaanse proposes. Here we have to make an important remark: he often defines science as an openbare31 discipline.e. meaning that science in its entirety is an open matter and accessible for everyone who engages in it. So far our study has introduced the rationale of Adriaanse’s arguments. as widely accessible as possible. We will continue with the systematic formulation of Adriaanse’s theory of knowledge and scientific method. The heart of the problem is not so much the initial experience of God. It is not a private matter. because it ought to be present on the public square. i. according to which he proposes that all theological work and talk of God ought to be measured by. This is precisely the core of Adriaanse’s argument for the impossibility of the rationality of classic theology. A Theory of Scientific Method Now we have arrived at the point where we can look in more detail at Adriaanse’s systematic formulation of the theory of scientific knowledge. but the more significant issue of the talk about God or the act of rationalization and coherent speaking about what one has experienced and what has been revealed. or even talk about what has happened and what has been experienced? The problem of rational justification is the main point of criticism Adriaanse poses to theology. The question which Adriaanse seems to be positing is this: regardless of whether revelation is possible or not. So what is a scientific theory? Adriaanse uses the following definition to identify a scientific theory: it is a sys31 Trans. reception of the revelation. N° 9 one cannot rationally justify God talk.

scientific theories cannot be about the whole of reality. These definitions have to refer to a concrete part of reality. only with a part of it. and particularly not contradictory statements.32 It is a rational system of thought and definitions. Finally.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 129 tem of thoughts and definitions. . b) Consistency – there should not be any contradiction within the whole of the argument. This point strongly connects to point ‘c’. What are the right steps towards developing a scientific theory? Or what are the right conditions that make scientific theories possible? Adriaanse lists five conditions that determine how a scientific theory must work: a) Precision – It has to be clearly stated which part of reality one is attempting to describe. about a concrete part of reality that is formulated in such a way that it is possible to deduce examinable theories from it. L. Leertouwer. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. rather.J.. H. logical consistency is required in the formulation of a coherent theory.. they must be a well defined part of it. Scientific theories cannot refer to reality as a whole. measure and so on.. in other words. Krop. Second. 32 Adriaanse. H. Het verschijnsel theologie. there is also the how of scientific theories. 1987) 54-56. taste. Since theories are claims about reality. d) Accuracy – The hypotheses which come from a certain theory must be confirmed by facts.A. c) Empirical adequacy – There must be sensory experiences which can be correlated with a specific theory. (Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. Science is not supposed to concern itself with the totality of all there is. they have to demark the specific area which they are about to address. scientific theories must be verifiable. touch. one should be able to see. and preferably non-contradictory in nature. as accurate as possible.

. A scientific phenomenon ought to be repeatable at all times with the same exact results. the task of the historian is to recover with as much accuracy as possible what has happened. Het verschijnsel theologie. goes further in search of a so called scientific theology. Adriaanse criticizes precisely this understanding by posing the critical question: what can publicly. To formulate this in a question. The reason is that. When events happen only once. Adriaanse. This search is in actuality about the possibility of theology in an age of science. 33 In other definitions of scientific theories. These methodological considerations bring us to our next point. according to classic theology God makes Himself known. one might come across one more point. By examining Adriaanse’s criticism of theology we submit our definition to be tested. having established what science and adequate scientific theories are. Therefore Adriaanse is not concerned with this aspect of the scientific theory. Or in theological terms: God cannot be 33 Adriaanse. repeatability is not possible. We have argued that in its strictest sense theology is talk about God and specifically talk about the identity of God. Repeatability is much more relevant for the natural sciences. N° 9 e) General acceptance of presuppositions – every scientific theory works with a certain accepted presupposition (as in historical studies. what are those possibilities? The Impossibility of Theology Earlier we have presented our definition of theology. in the sense which is universally valid. Adriaanse asks: Is theology possible in the present context of the scientific demands in a university? And if so. be said about God? In other words: what can be scientifically asserted about God? His answer is that there is nothing to be said about God in a scientific way.130 Teoloãki åasopis. However. 54-56. which Adriaanse omits from his own system and that is repeatability. in the field of humanities and in studies such as history. one assumes that he or she may know the past).

F. H. rijksuniversiteit. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. E. 36 Het Het specifiek specifiek theologische theologische aan aan een een Berkhof. Here Berkhof talks in more detail about. en uitgeg.15. E.g. We want to understand the arguments Adriaanse presents and the way he applies the above definition and conditions of scientific theory to classic theology. God is the object of theology.. 1981). H. van Gennep en W. We already have seen the five conditions necessary to establish a theory as scientific.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 131 known unless He revels Himself. Flesseman-van Leer. red. These are two critical reasons why Adriaanse considers classic theology as being not scientific. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . Classic Theology and the Demands of the Modern Scientific Method Adriaanse analyses theology by measuring its scientific merit.v. 35 Adriaanse.O. The next step is to put classic theology against these conditions. (Nijkerk: Callenbach. how God is the object (voorwerp) of the study of theology. according to Adriaanse. t. The main question here is: how does classical theology measure up to the demands of modern scientific theories? The answer is: 34 Adriaanse. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz.35 Another critical point Adriaanse makes is that because classic theology is talk about God. . Verdonk.34 Revelation. is not in any way public and therefore the irreconcilable difference remains between the practice of public science and the talk of God.36 This very objectification of God is impossible. dr. 9. rijksuniversiteit.

57-63. if God created the world good. is able to measure up to the standards of modern science. This is the reason why theology has to be classified as a pseudo-science. then why is there evil? Good vs. or presupposition of atheism. The critical question is often asked here of how can one talk about something one has not seen? 4) Accuracy – based on the above empirical in-adequacy. God and the world as creation37) it does not correspond to the condition of scientific precision. 2) Consistency – essentially consistency is possible in classical theological theories. .132 Teoloãki åasopis. Het verschijnsel theologie. which is needed.38 The conclusion of the above considerations is that theology only on one point. N° 9 1) Precision – because classical theology deals with the totality of reality (i. Where does this leave classic theology? What 37 Science deals with all that is in the world and not with the world itself. Therefore Adriaanse’s argument establishes the following: classic theology does not correspond to the demands of a scientific theory therefore is not considered to be a scientific discipline.g. They are theoretical in character thus miss empirical adequacy. Theology cannot pretend to deal with reality as a whole. 38 Adriaanse. namely consistency. it ought to focus on a specific point of reality. however. evil is hard to explain consistently).e. considering issues related to theodicy (e. However. 3) Empirical adequacy – is clearly impossible for the statements about God. in reality it is much harder. in today’s understanding of science all theories are developed from the vantage point. 5) General acceptance of presuppositions – the presupposition which all classical theologies share is that there is a God. the condition for accuracy is also impossible.

This constant growth. rather. Here we understand the word ‘God’ to mean an entity in itself who can be experienced in his revelation in time and space. It is a challenge that goes right to the heart of what theology is. one can trace the development of theology through the ages and come to the conclusion that it is a living discipline. The Complete Loss of the “Talk of God” The implication of the above argumentation is that scientifically there is nothing to be said about God. Second. probably the most important point for our work: talk of God in a university setting is deemed impossible. We also have in mind the reformers who in the context of the church developed and reformed theology. redefinition and affirmation of theology we call a living discipline. He suggests that the theologian cannot talk about God. in order to be able to maintain any standing. which in turn has an effect on its methodology and content. The question is: what is the way forward. it loses its position as one of the sciences in the universities.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 133 are the consequences? First. We think here of the early church fathers who did theology in the context of various competing philosophies and theologies. as understood in the classical sense. This is ultimately what it means the loss talk of God in theology. Theology thus. God. is in a situation of crisis. This is what it comes down to eventually: the complete loss of the talk of God. he qualifies its object.’ Here ‘God’ means a conceptual entity of the human . if there is nothing to be said about God as such? Adriaanse is not about to discard theology. From the vantage point of the scientific method and philosophy of science theology as a discipline faces one the most critical challenges of our time. theologians are faced with the same kind of challenges. Adriaanse through his critique addresses this very challenge. because by its method and content it only provides pseudo-knowledge. presented by the scientific developments. It has always sought to define itself on its own and in the context in which it was practiced. And third. The partial conclusion is this: classical theology when measured by the standards of science is no science. In modern times. but only about ‘God. Historically. adaptation. it has to fall under general religious studies.

This kind of organization has led to the decentralization of theology and to the compartmentalization of the various theological disciplines. closely related to religious science. Religious philosophy. As one might expect classic theology is only taught in faculties which are affiliated with a specific church and denomination. has had a political and administrative influence on the organization of the public universities and their faculties in the Netherlands. This is a significant move. the public universities function as duplex ordo. In the public faculties religious science is increasingly taught of as part of the greater humanities. The theologian has to talk about ‘God’ only in terms of what human beings think about ‘God.134 Teoloãki åasopis. during this century. Since the Enlightenment. Here classic subjects such as exegesis come under the department of arts.’39 When ‘talk of God’ is lost. has moved from its dominant and privileged position into being considered.’ Thus. Religious philosophy is 39 Adriaanse. which means that there is a separation between public universities and church theology. all that remains is talk of human religiosity. Religious studies and science is a fairly recent development in the field of sociology and cultural anthropology. also finds its roots in this age.’ Therefore. to the subject. the ultimate object of theology is not God but the human beings who talk about ‘God. This turn. N° 9 mind. After Schleiermacher and Feuerbach religion is understood to be the deepest longing of human beings. one can only ask about religion. where religion is researched as a cultural phenomenon. The general tension between religious science and theology remains. Since 1876. Therefore the object of research is the religious human subject. one religion among other religions. It is a shift from theology to anthropology. scientifically. Christianity. Het verschijnsel theologie. 63. meaning the human attitude towards ‘God. religious science has found its home in cultural studies. This often causes uneasiness for theologians trying to find their way in this new constellation of sciences. church history under the general department of history. . practical and pastoral theory under psychology and-so-forth.

This in turn begs the question: How does one talk about God in a publicly responsible way? The short answer to this question according to Adriaanse is religious science. it presents and explains religion as a universal human possibility.42 This demarcation has to be maintained as strictly as possible. Only the human word about ‘God’ is the object of research and science. God. in theology. a divinity.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 135 not about showing the truth of one religion against the other.73.e. as is the case with dogmatics. seen or talked about as an entity of its own reality. 89-96. rather. meaning a ‘God’ as talked about by people. By consequence it is religious anthropology. Conclusion The working thesis of our study is that theology fundamentally is talk about God and more specifically talk about the identity of 40 41 42 Adriaanse. The focus. Het verschijnsel theologie. 63. Adriaanse. Only a human definition of ‘God’ is valid matter to study for the theologian or the scientist of religion. this move is a move from metaphysics to religious and cultural anthropology. is impossible. The quotation marks have a very specific purpose in defining the division.41 Adriaanse then concludes that the scientific character of religious science can be maintained as long as there is a clear demarcation from classic theology. is no longer on the Theos but on the human being. Religion understood as an expression of a whole range of human projections on ‘God’. Het verschijnsel theologie. In philosophical terms.40 We previously have seen what the loss of the ‘talk of God’ entails as meant by Adriaanse. Het verschijnsel theologie. Adriaanse further develops the following differentiation to show the essential divergence between religious science and theology: Theology must be about ‘God’. Adriaanse. i. This might seem speculative in nature but it is a real differentiation. . Theology in this sense is about religion.

One can only talk about ‘God’ as a concept. which is . Our main argument against Adriaanse is that we do not talk about God as the one who is above the line unrelated to His presence.J.136 Teoloãki åasopis. Therefore Adriaanse calls for the abandonment of theology and proposes ‘religious studies’ as a more ‘scientific’ alternative. He argues that. H. is a metaphysical matter and thus not open for public inquiry. theology defined as talk about God. Adriaanse has a concept of God. we point toward a dynamic understanding of the word ‘God’. His conclusion is: theology considered from a scientific perspective. is impossible. as such. Modern scientific theory works with a definition of God as a metaphysical transcendent being. considering the scientific developments of the last two centuries. The reason is that God. there is no reason why theology ought not to be an academic discipline. Essentially. is a non-academic discipline. what we were dealing with is the understanding of the word ‘God’. N° 9 God. Adriaanse’s work was the guideline for discussing the matters related to the test. By using the term ‘identity’. The identity of God substantiates what we understand by the word ‘God’. Then it considers this God inaccessible and impossible to talk about Him. We formulated Adriaanse’s challenge in the following question: does theology deserve the adjective ‘academic’? Is there a kind of God talk that is justified or at least plausible for such an academic discourse? Considering the main narrative texts of our theological tradition (the basic texts in the Bible) and the long and rich history of God talk. we can say that we understand that there might be difficulties considering the scientific developments of the last century. Adriaanse in his criticism of classic theology focuses on the wrong God. which is other than the paradigm of God talk in Israel and the Church. which is intrinsically related to human religious consciousness and the human ability to project a higher being. but we talk about God who is present in His acting in the history of His people. To answer Adriaanse’s challenge. It was meant to compare theology to the scientific demands for an academic discipline. Exactly those developments are problematic when it comes to theology and specifically to God talk. We have submitted our thesis to the test in light of the religious scientific critique of theology.

there He is as well. i. in their history. talks to them. one of the most basic and important confession of Israel. The way we talk about God is neither the theoretical ‘God’ of philosophy nor a God who is only proclaimed in the Word. where God is defined as a high being which exists outside the reality we experience as human beings. It is by grace that He enters . acts and moves. The biblical narratives identify God as a person who gives His Name and where His Name is called upon. He understands classic theology as being about a constructed ‘God’. The Name. The way we understand the word ‘God’ is the way biblical narratives identify God. theologically speaking. Adriaanse’s criticism of theology pertains exactly to this ‘God’. He appears to people. Theologians through the ages have struggled with this very issue. YHWH does not conform to the ideals of His people. His people’s history is His history as well. judging people and restoring them. The word ‘God’. He is not to be manipulated nor used for their purposes. YHWH. When we talk about God we talk about YHWH. They have to live with the knowledge that their God is God. but the God who is identified in the history of His people. and relates to them so much that there is talk of a marriage between God and His people. therefore He does not fit any philosophical system or rationality that tries to domesticate Him according to its own rules. address. God has an identity and is not merely a definition. is a reminder of this very truth. He does things like saving people. the biblical narratives about YHWH. Time and time again we hear the motto: YHWH is God and not the idols. We understand that theology pertains to this God. God talk.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 137 fundamentally defined by the Name of God. which means that He is free to be and act according to His own will. Through those narratives God exists as a separate entity who talks.e. for Adriaanse. qualifies the meaning of the word ‘God’. He does not simply exist: He acts. The Shema. i. He does so not outside the perceived reality but in the reality of their lives. namely to show that the identity of God is decisive for their respective theologies. It is not a constructed understanding of the word. This is precisely the problem. ultimately emanates from the religious imagination of humans.e. That is the reason why he opts for understanding the word ‘God’ as a human projection.

YWHW. The history of Israel. The nature of the texts and their content puts us into a position where we can affirm that theology is indeed talk about God in a specific way about His identity. touched and defined by this God. To follow Adriaanse and denounce theology. Even though they are two different people. by being in relationship they are one. Therefore we see no reason why theologians should abandon theology as God talk. So there is a concrete place where not only God speaks. The texts give voice to those human experiences. as not being God talk. humanity and the world. Biblical theology shows the way of talking about God and His identity and also that to whom God speaks become the carriers of His presence in this world. would be to ignore these texts and what they say about God. This is the reason why knowing God is not a matter of epistemology but of history. N° 9 into the vulnerable covenantal bond with them. by participating in the lives of His people. . Just like a married couple. as the cumulative experiences of those whose lives have been addressed.138 Teoloãki åasopis. is YHWH’s history in their interrelated identities. attaches His identity to them. We have made it plausible that in biblical theology there is no indication why theology should be seen anything less than talk about God as He indentified Himself in the history of His people. but we who have heard also talk about God. which tell of God and who He is. the participants become one and share the same history.

Barth. Het verschijnsel theologie. God kennen – met God leven.. Proslogion: 1965. Berkhof. M. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo.. K. K. New Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. . Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. A... Barth. van Gennep en W.J. 1988. Kampen: Kok.J. H. 1987.J. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden .O. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. E.. Nijkerk: Callenbach. H. Leertouwer. 1982. Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. t. vol I. en uitgeg. 1981. red. Krop. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie.g. 2002. Nijkerk: Callenbach.. Charlesworth. 1932-1938 Edition. Adriaanse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 139 Bibliography Adriaanse.A. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. Flesseman-van Leer.v.. Beek van de. H. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. F. E.. H. Anselm. L. H. Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. Verdonk. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. trans. dr.

8e druk. “Offenbarung. A. Kampen: Kok. 1. 1997. 2004. Berlin: De Gruyter. 2nd Ed. (ed.W. Grenz.]. An Introduction. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. C. 2000.. Christian Theology. K. Conjectures and Refutations.140 Teoloãki åasopis. 2003. vol. The Triune God. vol... 1997. London: Routledge.. 1963. Oxford: Blackwell. Theology for the Community of God.) Karl Popper. 2002. Systematic Theology.D. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. [reprint of the 1831 ed. J. Oxford: Oxford University Press.1. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. Christelijk Geloof. II Religionphilosophisch” RGG4 /VI .. Schwöbel. R.. H..E. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. London: Routledge. Jenson. O’Hear. McGrath. F..E. S. Schleiermacher. Popper. A.R.. N° 9 Berkhof.

Identity and Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar Abstract: Religion is seen by many as one of the main causes of the conflict between people in the Balkans. In a post-war city like Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina religious identity is one of the main markers of division between different groups. Evangelical Church. Mostar. Identity. therefore would not expect religion to play a positive role in the process of reconciliation between Islamic Bosnian Muslims and Catholic Bosnian Croats. Evangelical believers do not fit in any of the main people groups because the main criterion for belonging to a group is religious background. Religious Anthropology. Bosnia and Hercegovina. Peace-building.6Mostar) Praying on the Front-Line Religion. This church plays an interesting role in a society that is characterised by clearly divided groups. there are religious groups that can contribute to the peace-building efforts. This article discusses reconciliation in the Evangelical church in Mostar. Ethnicity. Reconciliation. However. . reconciliation in itself is not an intentional objective of the church. This can serve as a first step in the process of reconciling conflicting groups.991(497. One. Key words: Religion.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 141 UDK 284. However. The Evangelical church is therefore a neutral place where people with different ethnic identities can meet each other. Conflict.

Religion and religious groups in the Balkans are usually associated with conflict rather than with reconciliation. Strangely enough the symbol for unity is a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee. This peculiar choice shows how hard it is to find a suitable symbol for unity in the complex situation of this country. It may seem strange to look for reconciliation in a religious group. I do not want to deny the contribution of religion to the conflict. The main subject of this article is the role of reconciliation between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The constant threat of attacks in all major cities in Europe has its impact 1 In the English literature the term Bosnia is normally used for the country as a whole. A lot of attention has been given to the way religion was used as justification of violence in the war at the end of the 20<^th century in former Yugoslavia. The statue showed Lee in a typical fighting pose. a monument for unity had been erected in Mostar. However. . when I specifically intend to say something about the Bosnian. 2006). Serbs and Croats alike (Zaitchik. N° 9 Introduction Ten years after the violent ethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina1 came to an end. Instead of using the full name of the state: Bosnia and Herzegovina. I will mainly use the abbreviation BiH throughout this article. This subject is relevant to many people for several reasons. The terrorist attacks on New York. I will make it explicit. People from Herzegovina. where I did my research. see themselves as Herzegovinians rather than Bosnians.142 Teoloãki åasopis. The first reason is related to the current global political situation. or the Herzegovinian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The argument for choosing Bruce Lee is that he is worshipped by Muslims. Madrid and London almost ten years ago have shocked the world. At first sight this subject may seem contradictory in itself. The tension between Islamic cultures and the western world is still in the news on a daily basis. but my primary focus in this article is on the contribution of religion and religious groups to the reconciliation process.

Although the context in BiH is different from most other places in the world.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 143 on the debate about pluralistic and multi-ethnic societies. In 1993 the old Ottoman bridge of Mostar was destroyed before the eyes of the world. In the church where I did my research. The central question in this article is ‘What is the role of the reconciliation process between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar?’ My focus is on reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. It is hard to define the boundaries of an Evangelical Church. Cities like Sarajevo and Mostar have a long history of dealing with different religions and cultures within its boundaries. Reconciliation is one of the main objectives of many humanitarian organisations There is a lot of discussion about the possible strategies that can be used to achieve reconciliation. With this article I hope to contribute to this discussion. the debate about the Bosnian conflict between Muslims and Christians speaks into the debates about this same conflict in other parts of the world. The specific context of the Evangelical Church in Mostar naturally makes it hard to generalise any conclusions. though I am fully aware that this study is a mere starting point. Apart from the topicality of religion and reconciliation on a global scale. It is not my objective to define who is a true evangelical and who is not. The rebuilding of the bridge has accordingly become a symbol of reconciliation. I have chosen to do my research in a small church. I think it is impossible to draw . no defined membership exists. When I write about the Evangelical Church I mean the group of people that comes to activities organised by the church on a regular basis . For centuries the Balkans have been the bridge between Christian and Islamic culture. into a symbol of cultural and religious conflict. either in the Balkans or anywhere else in the world. This act of destruction changed what had. been a symbol of religious and cultural tolerance. for centuries. this subject is also relevant to those working for grass roots organisations doing peace building. Terrorist attacks throughout the world raise questions about religious and cultural tolerance and the way ethno-religious groups can live alongside each other.

• How do people in Mostar in general construct their identity? • How do evangelical Christians in Mostar construct their identity? • What role does ethnicity play in the church? • What kind of relationships do evangelical Christians from different ethnic backgrounds have in Mostar? • In what way does the Evangelical Church actively support reconciliation? . Nevertheless. The role of reconciliation in a church is very dependent on the specific circumstances.144 Teoloãki åasopis. In order to be able to draw any conclusions on a reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church. N° 9 conclusions about the role of reconciliation in churches in general. Reconciliation can have a comparable role in various contexts. Churches differ from place to place and the church in Mostar differs in many ways from a church in Amsterdam or even in Sarajevo. This does not mean that my findings are of no value for any other context. the answers to my questions are based on the specific situation of the conducted research. five sub-questions need to be looked at.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

145

Conceptual Framework
Some of the concepts that have been used in this article could be confusing and their boundaries need to be defined. A first concept that needs clarification is religion. The role of religion in the Balkan conflicts is often debated. For a good understanding of the role of religion and religious groups in the processes of both conflict and reconciliation, it is necessary to explain how I define religion in this context. There are many definitions of religion in use, but the discussion on the definition has two extremes2. On one of the spectrum scholars define religion by the function it has in society. From this functionalistic perspective religion is for example everything that is used to give man a higher purpose in life. The difficulty with definitions like this is that the existence of religion is explained by its function. Religion is in this way reduced to a human functional construct. On the other end of the spectrum are the scientists that use a substantial definition of religion. A famous example is Tylor’s definition. He states that ‘religion is the belief in spiritual beings’ (Lambek, 2002: 21). This definition comes close to the popular use of the word religion in common parlance. In this perspective there is hardly any attention for the function religion fulfils in society. The focus is on the substantial characteristics of religion. In theology this last approach to religion is more common. In the social sciences there is more attention on the functional aspects of religion. It is not surprising that most anthropologists use a more functional definition of religion, because anthropology has human behaviour in society as its object of study. In the analysis of processes of conflict and reconciliation in a religious group it makes sense to use a functional definition of religion. But I want to avoid giving the impression that I see religion as a human construct. In this article I give an anthropological perspective
2 I divide the definitions of religion in substantial and functional definitions following Berger (Berger 1967: 194). In the first appendix to The Sacred Canopy, Berger discusses the sociological definitions of religion.

146

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

and therefore my focus is unavoidably on the functional aspects of religion. Religion is part of the total framework of systems of meaning making that people use to define their position in reality. Religion can therefore be seen as a part of culture. Religion is that part of culture that is connected to the belief in a supernatural reality. A human being is capable of constructing religion and reshaping religion. On the other hand religion has impact on the way people think and act. It is therefore of crucial importance in the way people deal with issues of conflict and reconciliation. The second concept that needs some clarification is identity. Just like religion, the word identity is often used without a clarified meaning. Identity seems to be a fashionable topic and only a few decennia ago the concept was hardly ever used in the social sciences. Identity is becoming more important, because boundaries are becoming less clear. People have to find out who they are and to which group they belong. Identity says on the one hand something about the essence of a group or a person. On the other hand the concept has to do with the outside boundaries that separate one entity from another. Identity plays a role when clear boundaries are sought. When a group wants to distinguish itself from a different group, it will stress its identity. In this case identity has to do with difference. In other cases identity plays a binding role. The concept is then used to stress things that members of a group have in common. In this case identity has to do with similarity. These two aspects, difference and similarity, are central to identity. This shows why it is such a multifaceted concept. I define identity as the common aspects of a group that distinguish one group from others. It should be noted that every person has multiple identities and these change over time (Lifton 1995: 1-20). The boundaries of group identities run through groups that have a shared identity. Let me illustrate this with an example from Mostar. A Christian teenager who lives in West Mostar and comes from a Muslim background has multiple conflicting identities. He is young, ethnic Muslim, religiously Christian, West Mostarian, Herzegovinian etcetera. In different situations this person will stress different identities. In one situations he might focus on the characteristics he shares with certain

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

147

people and in different situations he might stress those things that distinguish him from these same people. In the complex situation where religion, nationality and ethnicity are all intertwined, identity plays a crucial role. When we look at conflict and reconciliation we have to take notion of the complex system of identities and the ways these are constructed. It has much impact on the way groups and individuals interact. In everyday use, identity is often regarded as something static. People have one identity and it never changes. It is important to realise that people think about identity in this way. The ideas that people have about identity have impact on the way they behave and these ideas form a part of the social reality that I study (Baumann, 1999: 81-96). There is no point in neglecting the existence of these ideas even though I think these ideas are based on a misunderstanding of identity. In the analysis of social developments in BiH it is impossible to neglect the concept of ethnicity. Ethnicity is a form of identity. It is the identity of a group that sees itself as being culturally distinctive from other groups. Eriksen points to the fact that for ethnicity to come about, groups must at least have some form of social contact (Eriksen, 2002: 12). Ethnicity is a relational concept and not the property of a group. A strong tendency exists throughout BiH to essentialise ethnicity and therefore people’s ethnic identities. According to most people a person is Croat, Serb or Muslim. Birth determines to which of these groups one belongs. Every group claims to have a separate origin and history. This essentialist understanding of ethnicity is for a great deal based on myths of clearly distinguishable people groups (Baumann, 1999: 65, 66). Dubious interpretations of history often form the basis for these ideas. An example of this is the conviction that exists throughout BiH about the history of the Bosnian Church during the Middle Ages. Many times during my fieldwork, people tried to convince me of the fact that their ancestors had been Bogomils. To them this was proof of the Bosnians not being Catholics like the Croats. The actual historical evidence for this assumption is minimal. Nevertheless, many Bosnian Muslims still believe this. For them it is part of the justification of an independent Bosnian state. This exemplifies how people interpret history to draw

148

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sharp boundaries between ethnic groups. These boundaries are quite problematic in BiH, because it is hard to distinguish Croats, Serbs and Muslims from each other. They all generally have the same appearance and until the war they spoke the same Serbo-Croatian language. The only clear difference is their religious conviction. and this difference is therefore strongly articulated. Religion is not only used to distinguish one from the other, it also serves as a moral justification for hatred towards the other group. Although I believe that this essentialist idea of ethnicity is based on questionable argumentations, I do believe it strongly influences developments in BiH and still continues to do so. It is interesting to see that ethnic groups in BiH point to their long separate histories, while at the same time differences are being created in the present. The separate languages, for example, are a recent phenomenon. As I have said earlier, people are being transformed by the systems of meaning making that they construct themselves.

Research Methods3
In order to find answers to the question under consideration I undertook anthropological research. The research methods I chose are typically for cultural anthropology. Most of my findings stem from the material I collected in fieldwork I did in the first half of 2005 in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. To find answers to the formulated questions I conducted qualitative research. This seemed the most suitable method to find answers to my questions. Relationships between people in a church can hardly be studied through surveys or other quantitative methods. Furthermore, many of my questions regard personal experiences. Building a relationship of trust is of crucial importance to achieve insight in people’s convictions. From February till June 2005 I stayed in Mostar and became part of the local Evangelical Church. Subsequently participant observation became my main
3 The research was part of my studies at the Social and Cultural Anthropology department of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.

relatively many foreigners came to church. creating confidential relationships is crucial for qualitative research. Although the people in the church knew I was doing research. One advantage of interviewing over mere observation is that it produces very clear data. As I said. Most of them were aid workers and missionaries. It was harder for me to get in contact with older women in church. I have interviewed mostly young people and church leaders.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 149 research method. All names of informants in this article are fictitious. I have tried to integrate into the church as much as possible. Therefore I spent a lot of time with people in smaller groups and one-on-one. drinking coffee or just walking on the street5. Most of them had never heard of anthropology and had no clue what my research was about. . but also many informal activities like birthdays and barbecues. The older people in church are mostly women and. bible studies and worship meetings. Next to participant observation I also used interviews as a research method. It was important to get to know people from the church also on a personal level. people regarded me as just another foreigner in church4. youth meetings. In the four months I spent in Mostar I successfully integrated in the church and created some good relationships. The big drawback of this is that the interview setting is somewhat unnatural. 4 Usually. The data obtained from interviews may perhaps be clear but less reliable. like I said before. For me as a young man it was easiest to get in contact with young people and mostly with men. 5 Drinking coffee and walking around in town are the main pastimes among the Mostarians. This was a good way to speak with people about various matters. I visited many official church-activities like Sunday services. it was harder for me to get in contact with them. This has to do with the demographic composition of the church.

further strengthen essentialist ideas. ethnicity and nationality are markers used to define one’s identity. It also widened the gap between groups. Religion. I am aware of the danger of an essentialist approach. The war has not only geographically divided Mostar in two. Religion is being essentialised in similar ways. belonging to a network also provides a feeling of security. In BiH this is more the case than in many Western countries. 1999: 67). It is often via friends or family that people acquire a job or legal permission to start a business or build a house. Many Mostarians aspire to belong to clearly restricted groups. and identity construction. In his book ‘The Multicultural Riddle’ Baumann clearly shows how essentialist ideas have developed and what the results are: ‘Ethnicity and ethno-politics rely on rhetorics that trace cultural differences to biological differences. It is assumed that all Muslims are alike and that it has always been like that. An essentialist approach of ethnicity and religion freezes the conflict between groups and it closes the gates for reconciliation. Apart from practical advantages. This is not only the case among politicians but also among ordinary people. Together people form a network in which personal interests are looked after. Religions are often being divided along strict lines.150 Teoloãki åasopis. One person helps building the house of his brother in exchange for another service. or the categorisation of people into strictly defined groups. they aim at purifying and canonizing the cultural essences that they have reified…’ (Baumann. These groups have formed strong and opposing identities. N° 9 Identity The war has turned Mostar into a divided city. A policeman will not fine one of his friends. In the complex situation of Mostar essentialist ideas about ethnicity and religion are both present and problematic. Notions of belonging are of crucial significance to people in general and especially in Mostar. Being part of a network offers people practical opportunities. In this section I will discuss ethnic and religious identity. One is labelled a Muslim or a Christian. Identity politics. People feel safe in the street when they . In BiH and in Mostar many people have an essentialist approach towards ethnicity.

Belonging to a group offers human security in precarious situations. At the same time this is not easy in Mostar. This way of discussing identity assumes an essentialist understanding of both ethnicity and religion. Croatian culture. Nationality and ethnicity are not very clear categories and many people are confused about the boundaries of categories. is large in Mostar. When I asked a person about his ethnicity. Religion is for most people in Mostar the factor that determines to which group they belong. Children from mixed marriages. (Baumann. If a person for example believes in life after death. The amount of people that form an exception in some way or another. or ‘eccentrics’. Nevertheless I will try to give a general picture of ethnic and religious identity in the way I encountered it in Mostar. Religion defines a person’s ethnic group. Seeing ethnicity and religion as human constructs that show much diversity and change over time does not make them less real (Baumann. 1999: 85) Also Evangelical Christians do not really fit in one of the main categories in Mostar. Bringa states that her book ‘contains ethnographic data which are now history’ (Bringa. In her book ‘Being Muslims the Bosnian way’.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 151 know that they are part of the same group as others. or Croatian identity. It is impossible to give a definition of a Croat. The way Muslims perceived their religion before the war has totally been transformed by the war. this hope is reinforced by the affirmation of people around them. Muslim and Evangelical identity. but at the same time a person’s religion is determined by a one’s ethnicity. I will separately discuss Croatian. as Baumann calls them. Furthermore people feel supported in their convictions by others. 1995: 198). Otherwise anthropological fieldwork would . The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for strongly attached groups. With all these exceptions it seems impossible to have an essentialist approach to religion or ethnicity in Mostar. There is much variety within these categories and moreover they are constantly being transformed. on several occasions a people would answer: “I am a Christian”. I clearly want to acknowledge that both religion and ethnicity are mainly human constructs. refugees and displaced persons often have no clear idea about to which group they belong. but still many people do. 1999: 64).

The erected religious buildings form a conspicuous mark of the division. Different groups overlap here and people have multiple identities. an enormous cross was erected in 2000. Minarets and the colossal church tower of one of the catholic cathedrals define the skyline of Mostar. For example. Bosnian Muslim and evangelical. West and East Mostar had been ethnically cleansed: The west side was almost totally Croatian. The people in the church were part of larger ethnic groups. N° 9 not make any sense. Everyone who visits Mostar for the first time is immediately confronted with the wounds of the war. Nearly all Serbs had fled the city. Serbs. The city has a long history of ethnic tolerance. so Mostar can be seen as a small scale BiH. One cannot walk through Mostar without seeing this cross. the east . On the Hum Mountain south-west of Mostar. After that I will discuss separately Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat identity. It is important to realise that although Mostar had a very diverse population. the surrounding region lacks much diversity. Constructing Identity in Mostar: Communal Factors A number of factors have significant influence on the way identity is being constructed in Mostar as a whole. a person can at the same time be Mostarian. Just like BiH reflects the complex mixture of peoples of the former Yugoslavia. Croats and Muslims managed to live in peaceful coexistence for a long period of time. Many destroyed buildings around the old front line form a visible scar. The war has changed the face of Mostar beyond recognition. West of Mostar lives a vast Croat majority. and identity of evangelicals in Mostar. My research population consisted of the evangelical community in Mostar.152 Teoloãki åasopis. In this section I will first discuss factors in identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The region east of Mostar is a Serb dominated area. Neither can one walk through Mostar without hearing the loud sound of the prayer call from the minarets’ speakers that are turned towards the west side of town.

In June 1996 the first municipal elections were held in Mostar. Many young and educated people with opportunities had left Mostar and the country. 2002: 105. which function as separate bodies. Another important development in the reintegration process was the introduction in 1998 of one currency: the convertible mark (Bose. The same can be said of many institutions. Croatian history and have catholic religious classes.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 153 side had become almost 100% Muslim. although pupils can choose for ethics instead. People from surrounding villages had taken their places (Bose. The city was turned into a depressive scene. Schools on the west side have a curriculum that differs from east side schools. At the same time a multi-ethnic police force was established. In east side schools pupils learn Bosnian . These elections were the first in BiH after the Dayton Agreements. Some important steps towards unification were taken in the first few years after the war. There was not much left of the once so pretty town of Mostar. It breathed death and destruction. An important element of division in Mostar is the educational system. In practice the west and the east have separate police forces. All bridges across the Neretva. The character of the city had changed tremendously. Citizens of Mostar voted strongly along nationalistic lines. 106). The EUAM (European Union Administration of Mostar) had the difficult task of supervising the initial reconstruction and the reintegration of Mostar (Bose. In west side schools pupils learn Croatian language. After the elections a local city council was formed with representatives from all ethnic groups. but this was not much more than a formality. Around the front-line all major buildings were ruined. 2002: 108). Not much was left of the old Ottoman centre of town. The representation was based on the pre-war demographic composition of Mostar. including ‘stari most’ were destroyed. One of them was the introduction of common license plates for cars so people could travel through the city freely. 2002: 112). The return of refugees did not go as fast in the first years after the war in Mostar as elsewhere in the country.

154

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

language6 Bosnian history and have Islamic religious classes. The gymnasium on Spanish Square in the centre of Mostar is the only school that uses curricula for both Muslims and Croats. This school is the pride of the international community, often given as an example of the success of reintegration Mostar. It is disappointing to see though that even here still classes are separated and that Croatian and Muslim children do not have much mutual contact. Mostar also has two universities, one on the east side and one on the west side. Between the two hardly any cooperation exists. East and West Mostar are marked by division and the two function in many ways as separate cities. Globalisation is another factor that has impact on identity in Mostar as a whole. In his book on globalisation and identity, Appadurai points to the effect of globalisation on, amongst others, BiH (Appadurai, 1999: 305-324). He substantiates that globalisation brings about insecurity in people’s ideas on what their identity is. Old divisions have become less strict and maintaining a specific local identity becomes harder due to the constant influx of information from other parts of the world. According to Appadurai the insecurity about people’s identity is one of the main driving forces behind the horrible violence that came to BiH in the war. Clear boundaries between groups have become more fluid as a result of globalisation. Another result of globalisation; the increase of recourses of information, causes a reverse dynamic. It is nowadays easier for a Muslim in Mostar to feel part of a global Muslim community, than it was 20 years ago. The same can be said of Catholics. Television and Internet enlarge knowledge and awareness of worldwide connections and antagonisms. The growing conflict between the Western world and the Islamic world cannot stay unnoticed in BiH and Mostar. The presence of a large group of foreigners is another factor that impacts identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The recon6 Bosnian and Croatian language are very much alike. Before the war all people in BiH spoke Serbo-Croat. Since the war separate languages exist, although the differences seem in many cases artificial.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

155

struction of BiH after the Dayton agreement attracted many international organisations. Chandler calls BiH the world’s capital of interventionism (Chandler, 1999: 2). People are more and more fed up with the aid of the international community, but at the same time the city became strongly dependent on this foreign aid. Without aid Mostar would turn into an administrative chaos. Reconstruction would stop and for example public transport would probably collapse7 The international community plays a dual role in people’s lives. This relationship of dependency and contempt with the international community also impacts the way Mostarians view themselves and others.

Bosnian Muslim Identity
As I have said earlier, it is difficult say anything about an ethnic group without falling into the pitfall of essentialism. One is inclined to use generalisations. An advantage of my research is that my informants are part of a group that does not seem to fit into any system of categorisation. The Bosnian Muslims form an exception in a predominantly Christian continent. The Bosnian Muslims also form an exception in the Islamic community. Religion is practised in a highly unorthodox way, especially because religion has been suppressed in the communist period. Muslims in the Middle East do not have much in common with Muslims in BiH. I did my fieldwork in an Evangelical Church. The Bosnian Muslims that are part of this church can be seen as an exception to an exceptional group, because although they see themselves as part of the Bosnian Muslim ethnic community, they themselves are Christians8 An oversimplified categorisation is hardly possible in this case. I will first try to give a rough
7 All buses in Mostar have a Japanese flag painted on the side, under which it says that the bus is financed by the Japanese government. 8

The vocabulary is confusing in this matter. Bosnian Muslims form first of all an ethnic category and not a religious category. For most people in this group Islam is used as the main marker in

156

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sketch of the Bosnian Muslim community of Mostar. After that I will describe the Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church. The town of Mostar has a population of about 100,000 people. Approximately half of the population consists of Bosnian Muslims. Although the Muslims of BiH can hardly be compared to Muslims in the Middle East or Turkey, there are many elements in Bosnian Muslim culture that one can trace back to the period of Ottoman occupation. The architecture of the old centre of Mostar and of the biggest part of the east bank differs from the architecture in West Mostar. The Muslim parts of town have small streets with many houses built close together. Some of the architecture has oriental elements. The most important piece of Ottoman architecture is of course the Old Bridge (Stari Most). In the small shops around the Old Bridge Turkish-like artefacts are being sold and Turkish coffee is being served in bars where people play tavla9 In this part of town you hear people say ‘alaikum’as a greeting to each other. Walking around in Mostar’s old town feels a bit like walking in an open-air museum. It does not give a very accurate picture of the everyday life of Bosnian Muslims. In most parts of town one cannot tell which person is a Muslim and which is not. The only Islamic law that is strictly observed is the probation to eat pork. Only a very small proportion of the women wear a head-scarf. The secular character of most Bosnian

their ethnic identity. I use the word term Bosnian Muslim also for those people this group who have converted to Christianity. In most literature the confusion is overcome by using the term Bosniak instead of Bosnian Muslim. This term is hardly ever used by any of my informants. Bosnian Muslims who converted to Christianity nevertheless see themselves mostly as belonging to the ethnic group of Bosnian Muslims. I have chosen to use this emic categorisation. Using the term Bosniak would oversimplify the matter. It is a mixed up reality, not only for the lay outsider, but also for many of my informants themselves.
9

A Turkish board game similar to backgammon.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

157

Muslims has to do with the suppression of religion during the communist period. For a long period of time Muslims were not recognised as an ethnic group of their own. Croats considered them converted Croats, Serbs saw them as converted Serbs. During the Yugoslav period there were no Islamic schools. Muslims from the cities differ in many ways from Muslims in the villages. Bringa shows that traditions play a stronger role in villages than in the cities (Bringa, 1995). A good example in her account is the fact that women change clothes when they go into town. In town they cannot wear their traditional clothes. Of course the situation has changed since Bringa did her research, but I do think that traditions are still much stronger in the villages than in towns like Mostar. In the last 15 years interest in Islam has grown in BiH. The first cause of this development lies in the war. The war hardened the borders between ethnic groups and as I stated before, religion is one of the main markers of difference between groups in BiH. Bosnian Muslim identity is articulated through a shared interest in Islam. A second reason why Islam is taken more seriously recently stems from the global conflict between the west and the Muslim world. People are forced to take sides in this debate. A third cause of the recent revival of Islam in BiH is the financial support that comes from Islamic countries and from Islamic communities in Europe. Throughout the country big mosques are being constructed with help of foreign funds. The Bosnian Muslims that I encountered do not have much interest in Islam. Most Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church consider themselves Christians. However, in many ways they feel part of the Bosnian Muslim community. Their focus is on East Mostar and they speak Bosnian instead of Croatian10 They go to Muslim schools, support FK Veleæ, (the east side football team) and are proud
10

There is not much difference between Bosnian and Croatian, but the small differences are important to people. If I want to buy bread in East Mostar I have to use a totally different word for bread then in West Mostar.

The Mostar he grew up in was a town where it did not matter what religious background one had. They also had a small plot of land where they grew some vegetables. Just after I left Mostar the oldest son started to look after some goats. They lived in a small house with their two sons and two daughters and one grandson. The only big difference is that their religious identity is Christian. Costs of living are not so high.158 Teoloãki åasopis. . His wife is also a Bosnian Muslim and she does not go to church. His parents were Partisans during the Second World War. He went to communist schools in Mostar and in Montenegro. although nobody was really watching. A good example is Boris. Altogether it was just enough to get by. He never prayed until he became a Christian and the only reason why he regarded himself as a Bosnian Muslim was that his father told him so. The daily pursuits consisted mainly of drinking Bosnian coffee and smoking. They were kicked out of their house and moved in with his sister who is now also sometimes coming to church. He became a Christian after the war. During the war. Boris’ father died when Boris was young. The television was always turned on very loud. Apparently the family lived on support from this daughter and from the church. N° 9 of the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. he is a middle-aged man who has been going to the Evangelical Church in Mostar for a few years. Sometimes Boris was studying some kind of textbook about Christianity. According to Boris. whom she met in Mostar. The house they lived in was only half finished. It seemed like the work on the first floor and the roof had stagnated a while ago. Mostar used to be the best city of the whole of Yugoslavia. They received help from a humanitarian organisation that was connected to the Evangelical Church. His father was an Imam in Mostar and his grandparents owned much land in the vicinity of Mostar. Boris did not believe in Islam. Although his father had been a religious leader. Neither Boris nor his wife had regular jobs. Boris grew up in the old town of Mostar. he and his family lived in Mostar. It was his son who convinced him to come to church. Apart from daily meals and cigarettes they did not have much expenditure. The majority of their family and close friends are Bosnian Muslims. One daughter has moved abroad where she got married to a former peace-force soldier.

The part of Herzegovina west of the Neretva River has been the cradle of hard-line Croatian nationalists. The evangelical Bosnian Muslims cannot really be considered part of the core of this ethnic group. They say that these Bosnian Croats are more Croatian than the Croats in Zagreb. Bosnian Croat Identity In Zagreb people make fun about the Bosnian Croats in Western Herzegovina. they have a marginal position in this community. Most of them are relatively poor and came in contact with the church during the war or shortly after. His upbringing had been more communist than Islamic and his father died when Boris was still really young. Bosnian Croats are proud to be catholic and are in many ways devoted to the church. Although they definitely consider themselves as Bosnian Muslims.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 159 Boris’ situation is in many ways typical of most of the Bosnian Muslims that come to church. . Even the smallest villages in this region have a Catholic church building. Catholicism is the most important marker of identity. Every year thousands of Catholics from all over the world come to Medjugorje be- 11 Although Boris’ father had been an Imam. I have not met any Bosnian Muslims in church that were part of a family in which Islam played a very significant role11 It is striking that of the evangelical Bosnian Muslims only a small minority lives on the east side of Mostar. mainly through humanitarian aid. I think this joke tells a lot about the way ethnic identity is being articulated by Bosnian Croats in Mostar. The red and white chequered flag hangs from almost every lamppost. I do not think Islam played a significant role in his life. The town of Medjugorje is one of the world’s largest places of pilgrimage. It is also typical that he was not very religious before he became a Christian.

During my stay Pope John Paul II died. at least among most Catholics. when it is illuminated. the atmosphere in West Mostar is much more similar to Western Europe than it is in East Mostar. Although most tourist businesses are mainly centred in the old Ottoman part of town. even at night. This is visible from the cars that people drive and the clothes that people wear. Secularisation as in Western Europe seems nearly absent in present day Herzegovina. . N° 9 cause of the supposed apparitions of Maria since 198112 In Mostar Catholicism also plays an important role in the expression of Croatian identity.160 Teoloãki åasopis. The commercial centre is much more developed than on the east side. On a wall in West Mostar somebody has put this clearly into words with spray-paint: od is Croatian The architectural differences between West and East Mostar are striking. One of the highest Church towers in Europe has been built in Mostar and as I mentioned before the giant Cross on mount Hum is visible from every corner of town. Most of the streets are much wider and there are many big apartment blocks. Faith is connected to the Croatian nation in a very direct way. Two big shopping malls have been built after the war where almost anything is for sale that one could buy in Western Europe. Masses are being attended frequently by most Bosnian Croats. the opposite is true for West Mostar. The 50. This was reason for a lot of grief in West Mostar. On the whole.000 Bosnian Croats in Mostar seem to be wealthier than their east side neighbours. most of the other economical activity is to be found in West Mostar. Most of the Bosnian Croats that I interviewed for my re12 The work of Bax (Bax: 1995) provides an extensive anthropological analysis of the developments of the catholic regime in Medjugorje. Bosnian Croats celebrate this by driving around town waving Croatian flags. When there is a sports event the Bosnian Croats are always supporting the Croatian teams and when BiH looses a football match. Bosnian Croats seem to feel related more to Croatia than to BiH. Where East Mostar has many narrow streets.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 161 search were in many ways proud to be Croatian. but I’m glad I’m Croatian. Breaking with the Catholic Church would cause a break with their family and it would mean a betrayal of their ethnic group.” Before Helena became part of the Evangelical Church she only went to the Catholic Church at Easter and Christmas. She is a 25-year-old Bosnian Croatian woman. for Bosnian Croats there is more to loose. She says about her ethnic background: "I can’t say that I’m not glad that I’m Croatian. Joining the Evangelical Church did not really mean a break with the church or with her family. Taking this step would implicate a big risk. I have a Croatian Passport. The majority of the Bosnian Croats I interviewed are part of families that are better of than the families of Bosnian Muslims in Church. Therefore. Sunday morning they go to the mass with their families. It is interesting that all Bosnian Croats that had some connection to the Evangelical Church do live in West Mostar. or I don’t hate Serbs. Helena lives in West Mostar and has a fairly good job. because it would cause big problems within their family. Helena is an interesting example. They keep their involvement with evangelical Christians a secret. Many of the young people that come to worship meetings on Wednesdays have never told their family about their baptism. I am for a lot of stuff…I live here on the west side and it’s a lot nicer. Half of my family is Orthodox. but I am glad that I am Croatian. even though their relationship with the Catholic Church was quite exceptional. She was baptised in the Evangelical Church in 1996. In the previous section I said that most Evangelical Bosnian Muslims do not live in East Mostar. For this reason it is impossible for most of them to come to the Evangelical Church on Sunday. For other Bosnian Croats who are involved in the Evangelical Church this is a lot more problematic. I don’t hate Muslims. that is really a lot easier for me…I don’t really hate anyone. . I hang around with both.

During my fieldwork I have visited many different meetings. At all these meetings I met different groups of people. all of them differ from the majority of their ethnic group when it comes to religion. for many individuals it is not so clear. The church has no official membership. This denomination is connected to the Evangelical Churches in Croatia. However. 1995). There is no Baptist church in Mostar. For example. and many people only come once in a while to activities organised by the church. It is therefore very important for the evangelical Christians in Mostar that they belong to the evangelical Christian community. Many people are in some way or another involved in the church. Religious background determines the group a person belongs to. Although all of them saw themselves as part of an ethnic group that transcended the church. N° 9 Evangelical Identity in Mostar So far. I have separately discussed the identity of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. Since I did my fieldwork in the Evangelical Church. The church in Mostar that I studied is part of the denomination of Evangelical/Pentecostal churches in BiH. There are no clear boundaries that determine who is in and who is out. In BiH there are two main denominations of protestant churches: Baptist churches and Evangelical/Pentecostal churches.162 Teoloãki åasopis. It is therefore really difficult to estimate how big this group of evangelical Christians is. The church in Mostar was founded by Christians from Croatia (Kelly and Sheppard. other young people only come to worship meetings on . some young people only come to the youth meetings on Sunday night. although it is clear that some people are definitely part of the church and some are not. This was for many of them of crucial importance for the way they constructed their identity. almost all my informants were in some way or another involved with the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Some people come to almost every meeting. Some of the pastors in BiH have studied at the evangelical theological seminary in Osijek in Croatia. It is hard to define the Evangelical Church. religion is the main determinant for most people in Mostar to distinguish between ethnic groups. As I have said before. others only came to one particular kind of meeting.

Hardly any students come to church although there are two universities in Mostar. Most of the people that come to church did not have much education. People from both East and West Mostar are attending the Brankovac church meetings. Bosnian Croats. Sometimes 25 people come.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 163 Wednesday night and some come to both. Most evangelicals in the Mostar church are people with limited opportunities. the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: one in East and one in West Mostar. Most of the young people are still in school except for some of the refugees. On average around 30 to 40 people come to these meetings. I did most of my research in the Brankovac church in East Mostar. Many of the refugees are illiterate. 13 There are refugee camps in the vicinity of Mostar. Kosovo Albanians. The pastor of the church is from a mixed Serb/Croat background. On these meetings there is usually not one dominant ethnic group. but some activities there are attended by people from both congregations. Gypsies and some people from England and the United States. The people that come to church activities come from a very mixed ethnical background. Significantly. On Wednesday evening worship meetings the majority of attendants is Bosnian Croat. . In each of the buildings meetings are being held. Many people are without a job or have low paid jobs. Just like any other social group the Evangelical Church has core members and members that take a less central position. On youth meetings on Sunday evening the majority of people is usually Bosnian Muslim and a relatively big group of refugees from other parts of the Balkans attend these meetings13 The number of people that come to these meetings changes a lot. Usually about 8-10 people come to these meetings and they are all young people. sometimes only a handful show up. Most people that live in these camps have come from Kosovo and some from Macedonia. A normal Sunday morning church service is usually attended by Bosnian Muslims.

The vision statement of one of these organisations. Usually these groups come during the summer to work for one of the charity organisations.S. Usually about 5 to 10 people from Britain and the USA come to church services on Sunday morning.164 Teoloãki åasopis.. Most of the time only those come of whom one. The reconstruction of Mostar attracted many of these missionaries.S. but also in the Brankovac church. Most charity organisations provide humanitarian aid and combine this with evangelising activities. Another relatively big share of the make-up of the church consists of foreign aid workers. 14 http://www.’ 14 Sometimes groups of missionaries from England or the U. the songs that are sung. In the first place the foreigners add up to the international character of the church. says for example:‘The vision of Novi Most International is to see young people in Bosnia Herzegovina bringing hope to their country by being instruments of positive transformation. though to a lesser degree. Somebody once said to me: ‘You will never find any Bosnian culture in the Evangelical Church in Mostar’. God is calling this generation of young Bosnians to be agents of positive transformation of their nation. This is especially the case in the West Mostar church. The presence of people from Western Europe and the U..novimost. Most of them speak some Bosnian or Croatian. Almost all the songs are translated American worship songs.A.html .A. Most young people that come to meetings do not go to the church service on Sunday morning. called Novi Most. The way a service is organised. all are very similar to the way these things are done in a Dutch or in an American Evangelical Church.org/page4. has quite a big impact on the identity of the Evangelical Church in Mostar. or both of the parents come to church. N° 9 Most men in the church are under 25 and in general men are a minority in most church activities. This international character of the church gives the members the idea that they are part of a trans-national network. the way in which people pray. Most of these people work in Mostar as missionaries for charity organisations. come for a short period to Mostar. Many of them have been in Bosnia for more than 5 years.

The Pentecostal religious network offers a similar kind of security and identity as the youth gangs do. But the same is also the case for Bosnian Croats who join the Evangelical Church. Apart from material benefits another factor that pulls people to the church is the idea of belonging to a group that provides a secure environment is. For Bosnian Muslims and Croats being baptised in the Evangelical Church is seen as a betrayal of their ethnicity. are more easily attracted than people that already belong to such a network. The Pentecostal churches offer an alternative trans-national network to these people. Muslims see baptism as a really big step. People have told me that in the past this was more often the case. They show that young people from El Salvador who come from poor and powerless backgrounds find security and identity in international youth gangs. Often being outside of . 2003). Some people in church call these people ‘rice Christians’. Those people that are not part of a network that gives them security and a place of belonging. Poor people are more attracted to a group that provides some material aid than rich people. During and in the first few years after the war. In Mostar the international character of the church also provides church members with a sense of belonging to a trans-national network. many people came to church because of material benefits.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 165 Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez discuss the importance of trans-national religious networks in an article on trans-national youth gangs and Pentecostal churches (Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez. In this period many people stopped coming to church. In many ways the presence of foreigners and the contacts with foreign churches pull a specific group of people towards the church. It is not surprising therefore that so many refugees have some sort of relationship with the church. In the last years the church has tried to make this group of rice Christians smaller. Some people were challenged in their motivations for coming to church. Both Croats and Muslims are very hesitant to be baptised in the even those who have been involved with the church for a long period of time. The leaders in church have been cautious to render too much material aid. For some Muslim people it means breaking all the ties with the family.

But this would not do justice to the reality that I encountered in Mostar. From my analysis one could conclude that people exclusively come to church to improve their situation. People from their own ethnic group see them as traitors. It also makes people part of a larger international network. Nevertheless people choose to speak out for their faith. She had kept it a secret for a long time. sometimes they don’t have the right connections. now become citizens of a heavenly kingdom. an old Bosnian Muslim man. For others the causes of marginality are less obvious. For this reason many refugees are outsiders in Mostar. N° 9 networks and being poor go hand in hand. He was beaten up by Roman Catholics Christians. Furthermore it provides people with a conviction of hope. During the war in Mostar he was put in a prison camp by Bosnian Croats for the simple reason that he was a Muslim. People that were marginalized in Mostar. Her mother was shocked by the news. it seems obvious. Ethnicity does not seem to play a big role in church. Just after I left Mostar a Bosnian Croat girl told her mother about her baptism. Some Mostarians cannot find security in either one of these groups. They have a totally different ethnic background and just do not belong to one of the groups. like refugees. In the Evangelical Church people not only find a safe group. For some groups. Most people in Mostar find this security in one of the two major ethnic groups. Religion is the most important marker of identity for both of these groups. This is the case for both Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. The Evangelical Church provides a safe environment for people from all ethnic groups. The insecure situation of Mostar creates the need for closely-knit groups that create a secure environment. Many people go through difficult situations because of their choice to become part of the Evangelical Church. Another contradictory example is Mehmed. This brings material benefits. who wore .166 Teoloãki åasopis. Religious identity is therefore of great importance. they also benefit from the presence of many international people. There are various possible reasons why some people do not find enough protection in one the major groups. For these people the Evangelical Church has a lot to offer. Sometimes it is because they live outside of town. This makes suffering in this world easier and gives people hope for a better future.

The main question of this article concerns the role of the reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. people do have freedom to make personal choices. Most scholars focus on the importance of macro-political and macro-economical factors. This example shows that although sociological factors have a lot of impact. I will first discuss the role of reconciliation in the church. After he was released from prison he decided to become a Christian and join the Evangelical Church. but my primary focus is on a grassroots level. I wanted to know if it was real or fake unity and I wanted to know where this apparent unity came from if it happened to be real. Reconciliation Since my first encounter with evangelical Christians in BiH I have been puzzled by the fact that some people from different ethnic backgrounds seem to get along so well in this community. In this prison he saw some kind of vision of Jesus. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church The Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: One in East Mostar and one in West Mostar. The west side . conflict resolution and peace building in BiH. The first time I saw a group of evangelicals worship together in unity it fascinated me.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 167 a picture of Jesus on their uniforms. As long as people do not reconcile on a local level. In this sense the church seems to take part in the division of Mostar. both churches have a very mixed group of attendants. Much has been written about strategies of reconciliation. viable peace is impossible. Nevertheless. I now want to analyse the way in which I encountered reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. This role has a lot to do with the way people deal with matters of ethnicity in church. a repetition of the disastrous events remains an unlikely but realistic possibility. Therefore I will also describe the role of ethnicity during church activities and outside of church matter. If the conflict between normal citizens is not resolved.

In an interview I asked Ivan. I believe that the idea of having two church buildings originated from this difference in strategy. one of the leaders of the church in Mostar. The Christian symbol of the cross. but it is incomprehensible with the fact that so many people from West Mostar go to the church on the East side. you cannot change overnight and deny something that was implanted in you for such a long time. A person has to loose these things when he or she joins the church. This sounds like a logical explanation for the two church buildings. Strangely enough a rather large proportion of the people that come to the East side church lives in West Mostar. In the same interview with Ivan he clearly states that from the beginning of the church. At the moment most people in church do not really seem to know why there are two buildings. In my research I mainly focused on the church in East Mostar. N° 9 church is attended by a slight majority of Bosnian Croats and the East side church has a slight majority of Bosnian Muslims.168 Teoloãki åasopis. These Muslims are living in a homogeneous Muslim environment and might feel unwelcome in a church where a lot of Christian symbolism is used. About nationalism of the Bosnian Croats Ivan said: “Roman Catholic background people are more connected to being Croatian and are more proud of that and while actually coming to the Evangelical Church slowly you are losing that…I would say that it’s a process. why the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two buildings. but that later the churches developed in a way that does not match with this strategy. Nationalism and ethnic pride are not very much accepted in the Evangelical Church. The church in West Mostar has a strategy of evangelism that is designed for people who live in West Mostar. He explained to me that both churches have a different strategy of evangelism. for example is not used in this church. ethnicity was supposed to play a minor role in church activities. . The church in East Mostar was started in 1997 to create a place where Bosnian Muslims from east Mostar feel welcome. That means for Bosnian Croats and for those Bosnian Muslims who live in a predominantly Christian environment and are therefore used to Christian symbolism. People from both East and West Mostar both attend the services in this church.

The church does not play an active role in promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups in Mostar. During the communist period all ethnic groups in Yugoslavia lived together with the motto ‘Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (brotherhood and unity). In that sense the church does play a role in the reconciliation process. People that come to church have relatively much contact with people from a different ethnic background.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 169 It’s a process. but the church has an impact on the way church people construct their ethnic identity. For decennia communism seemed able to have relative success in uniting the different ethnic groups of Yugoslavia. This is seen as a spiritual goal. The Evangelical Church tries to stay away from all political matters. Reconciliation between ethnic groups does not have anything to do with this spiritual goal for most people in church. Of course reconciliation with God and forgiveness play a role in church. This is an interesting comparison. In the Evangelical Church avoiding suppressing issues of ethnicity creates a situation that is comparable to the situation during the communist regime. During church activities Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats get along without paying attention to each other’s ethnic background. Ivan compared the situation in the Evangelical Church to the situation during the communist period. reconciliation between ethnic groups is not part of the agenda of the church. This is an unintended way of bringing ethnic groups closer together. Although ethnic groups mix in the Evangelical Church. Of course the violent break up of Yugoslavia has made many people sceptic about the value of this supposed unity under communist rule. This situation is a result from the fact that people are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in church. the life of Christ living in a person and slowly those things are dying. but there are no activities organised with the aim of bringing ethnic groups closer together. He said that people have to get along in church irrespectively of their ethnic background. . For the church this is too much a political matter.” It is not very surprising that ethnicity does not play a major role during church activities. The foremost goal of the church is to reach people with the message of Jesus Christ.

Furthermore there often were some people from mixed ethnic background. In my research I have tried to find out if this unity that I encountered in church is also continued in the life of church people. Scepticism towards brotherhood and unity during communism has proved right. Because of its clarity. There are few occasions in which Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats voluntarily come together. . Usually these people were not just Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. but also on other occasions that had not much to do with the church. He explained to me that some people outside the church thought that the Evangelical Church was a church for people from a mixed background. In my research I have tried to find out more about what lies behind this apparent unity.170 Teoloãki åasopis. people were present from various ethnic backgrounds. I have also interviewed church people about their ideas on ethnicity. N° 9 The next question is of course if this unity stretches beyond the walls of the church. The Role of Ethnicity in the Life of Church People There is no need for thorough research to come to the conclusion that the Evangelical Church is a place where ethnic groups mix in a way that is uncommon outside of church. this phenomenon was more the cause than the object of my research. The pastor of the Brankovac church and his wife are both from a mixed Croat/Serb background. An important question that I will discuss is therefore: how far do the relationships between people from different ethnic background in the church stretch? It could be possible that the apparent unity does not stretch beyond the church door. In my fieldwork I have observed people during church meetings. At almost all activities that I visited. The years of shared ideology could not prevent the harsh conflict that broke out in 1991. Gypsies and Serbs. but also Kosovo Albanians. First of all I want to describe the role of ethnicity in the activities organised by the Evangelical Church.

As one becomes part of the church. but that they just did not have so much contact with them. The longer they are evangelical Christian. Secondly. For all those who had a leading position in the church. The Wednesday night worship meetings where almost only visited by Bosnian Croats.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 171 During meetings it usually took me a while to find out people’s ethnic background. It therefore was a solid group and it was hard for outsiders to become part of that group. Perhaps non-Croats did not feel welcome because it is such a homogeneous group of Bosnian Croats. There are several factors that explain this. the less the importance of ethnicity. be- . Of course sometimes people for whom ethnicity is an important issue came to church activities. organised several years ago by an American missionary among Bosnian Croatian children. Almost all the people that came to the worship meetings got involved with evangelical Christianity through this project. There is one church related activity that is not attended by a mixed group of people. As I said earlier ethnicity does not play a foremost role during church activities. Sometimes it caused a lot of confusion when I tried to find out what a person’s ethnic background was. the church more and more defines one’s identity. In the interviews I had with some of the young people who come to these worship meetings they all told me that they had no problems with Bosnian Muslims. Most of them do not go to Sunday services in the Evangelical Church. People are in the first place evangelical Christian and not Bosnian Muslim. It was a topic that was not spoken about much. the pastor of the East side church explained to me that for many people ethnicity still plays a big role when they just start coming to church. This determines the majority of their relationships. but they did not have a central role during the meetings. Ethnicity is part of the old identity. Marco. On most occasions one or two people from a different background were present. ethnicity played a minor role. the worship group had evolved out of an evangelism project. but it was not like on most other church-related activities. First of all these meetings were always held in West Mostar and therefore all the people that came lived in West Mostar. Bosnian Croat or Albanian. because many people didn’t know to which group others belonged. They all live in West Mostar and go to Catholic schools.

N° 9 cause they join their families to the mass. They actively try to get more Bosnian Croatian children involved and more children from the West Mostar schools. In many ways this was a difficult task. More and more 15 During my stay Novi Most moved to a new location in Mostar. They go for coffee with one another and help each other with practical matters. Before their club building had been in East Mostar. they pray with each other and for one another. I only spent four months in Mostar.172 Teoloãki åasopis. People from different groups talk with each other. To get a more complete picture of people’s lives. This is not enough to participate in the lives of all church people. . On the one hand it became clear to me that on the long term people build relationships in church that go beyond church matters. One of the young people from this group started to come to church weekly and two others started to come once in a while. The longer a person is part of the church. the more he or she becomes part of a new network of people. I also had to observe and be part of people’s life outside of church affairs. During my research this pattern began to change. Like I said. Ethnicity does not seem to play a significant role in these meetings. People become friends with other people they meet in church activities. The worship group is exceptional because it is predominantly visited by Bosnian Croats. The next important question is how far this apparent peaceful coexistence stretches. They mainly worked with Bosnian Muslims and refugees. Some of them also got more involved with Novi Most. most activities are visited by an ethnically mixed group of people. Outside of church activities I met only a small group of people frequently and this group consisted mainly of young people. People get along with one another in church like nothing happened in the past. an evangelical youth organisation in Mostar15 They start to build stronger relationships with other people that are involved in the Evangelical Church and this automatically means that they also develop more relationships with people from other ethnic backgrounds. They wanted to get more children from West Mostar involved and therefore moved to a new location close to the former frontline.

I found that in many cases evangelical Christians stay attached to their ethnic group outside of church activities. Generally speaking the ethnic unification is not the same outside of church affairs as it is during church activities.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 173 relationships are being built of mutual dependency. In Mostar this is almost unavoidable due to the all-embracing division of the city. people also stay part of other social networks. Some people. The church does not have much impact on these relationships. who have been going to church for a long time. However. She helps out with the youth work. One evening I was on a birthday party of Amela. Unintentionally everyone becomes part of the division and reproduces it. Her friends are mainly people from church. it is very difficult to build and maintain relationships with someone who lives on the other side of town. have become part of a very diverse social network. For a person who lives in West Mostar and attends a school or works in this part of town. In contrast to the previous example of Amela. all guests were Bosnian Muslims. Most of them had been friends for a long time and in many cases there was some kind of blood-tie. Dijana has a group of friends from a very . They maintain strong relationships with other people in their ethnic group who are not part of the Evangelical Church. Family relationships are for many Bosnians of great importance. She has lived most of her life in West Mostar and has been going to the Evangelical Church since her early childhood. Nevertheless it is striking that also the network of evangelical Bosnian Muslims that live in the Croatian part of Mostar. predominantly consists of other Bosnian Muslims. Except from some British and Americans. a Bosnian Croatian girl who comes to Sunday services in the Brankovac church. a girl from a Bosnian Muslim family. A good example is Dijana. However. It is not surprising that most of the family members belong to the same ethnic group. Almost every time I met her she was hanging out with other young people from church. On her birthday party I did not see any Bosnian Croats. on the long term relationships will be built in the church that have an impact on people’s whole lives and also their relationships. Outside church affairs people maintain strong relationships with people from their own ethnic group.

He loves going to these worship meetings. A youth leader from the Evangelical Church spoke to him about how he should try to forgive the people that beat him up. He did not want to tell his name and then they asked for his identification card. Amir never took revenge. Young people grow up with the division and sooner or later it will affect them in some way. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that ethnicity still plays an important role in people’s lives. which he did not have. As far as I know. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. a group of Bosnian Croats had come up to him and had asked him for his name. Several weeks after this event Amir was still scared to go to West Mostar.174 Teoloãki åasopis. This example shows how hard it is to avoid the conflict in Mostar. N° 9 diverse ethnic background. but also difficult objectives of most peace building organisations. He told me that the previous night. Integration of ethnic groups is one of the most important. He also goes to Wednesday night worship meetings. Amir was of course not able to defend himself against a whole group of men. when he was walking around in West Mostar. despite his anger. In many ways this process of integration seems to be happening in the Evangelical Church. About a year ago he has been baptised in the Evangelical Church and ever since he has been very much involved in church matters. The contrasting examples of Amela and Dijana show that it is very difficult to draw general conclusions about the unifying effect of the church. is a small part of the post-war reconciliation process in the whole of Mostar and of BiH. Many organisations in Mostar attempt to create spaces where Bosnian Muslims and . Amir is an 18 year old Bosnian Muslim. Then the group started to beat him up because they knew he was a Bosnian Muslim. Much of the division along ethnic lines that characterises present-day Mostar and BiH is not present in the Evangelical Church. The situation in the Evangelical Church differs in many ways from the situation in other social groups. and his relationship with Bosnian Croat friends has not changed. No one can completely avoid it. One day I met Amir and he looked like he had been in a fight. The following anecdote shows this. where he is often the only Bosnian Muslim among Bosnian Croats. also in the lives of evangelical Christians.

However outside of church activities ethnicity often continues to play an important role in the life of evangelical Christians in Mostar. The division of Mostar has a lot of impact on people. At the same time there is also a change in convictions. So although in church people from different ethnic groups seem very much integrated. People change their moral standards and their ideas about forgiveness in the process of becoming an evangelical Christian. In many ways the . This has an effect on people’s ideas about ethnicity and about matters concerning reconciliation. People are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in the process of becoming part of the Evangelical Church. This is also the case for church people. Over time this has an effect on people’s lives. In the Evangelical Church people are called to forgive each other.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 175 Bosnian Croats can get in contact with each other. outside of church matters this integration appears to be less strong. Their new identity is neither Muslim nor Croat. In church people are expected to start a new life with Jesus irrespective of their ethnic background. This does of course not mean that they always will. but it does influence behaviour. the statue that was to symbolize unity was destroyed by vandals. What is left now is the empty pedestal. This is mostly also a gradual process. although it is not one of it’s objectives. Therefore ethnicity is not to have an important role during church activities. their lives and their social networks. In fact reconciliation does not play an active role in the church. The more a person becomes part of the Evangelical Church the more his or her social environment changes. Outside of church activities the radical change of people’s lives appears often far more gradual. but evangelical. In the Evangelical Church this is already the case for several years. Conclusion Shortly after the celebration of erection of the statue of Bruce Lee in Mostar. The primary objective of the church is to spread their message of Jesus Christ and most of it’s activities are focussed on this.

Almost none of the people that I studied during my fieldwork fit into the main categories in Mostar. When a person becomes part of the Evangelical . Being part of the evangelical community is therefore of crucial importance for them. this is a striking phenomenon. Belonging to a group offers human security in the precarious circumstances of Mostar. Ethnic differences do not play an important role in the church. In this article I have discussed the role of reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Unintended Reconciliation The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for close-knit communities. But this is only a very small community and there are reservations to be made about the way in which reconciliation is established in the Evangelical Church. It is the only religious group in Mostar that is ethnically mixed. Rebuilding Mostar is a slow and laborious project. the evangelical community defines their new identity. Some pessimists would say that reconciliation is not possible at all. When people join the church. In this final paragraph I will draw some conclusions.176 Teoloãki åasopis. a trans-national network to belong to and material aid. In the Evangelical Church in Mostar some cautious steps towards reconciliation are being made. The main reason for this is that they all belong to the Evangelical Church in some way or another. In a town where the division between ethnic groups determines nearly everything. One is tempted to become pessimistic when one is confronted with present-day Mostar. It is a monument for all the fruitless efforts to unify Mostar. N° 9 empty pedestal is a symbol in itself. The result is that the Evangelical Church in Mostar consists of people from various ethnic backgrounds. For those people church offers a local community. People who neither adhere to the catholic nor to the Islamic faith are in a comparable marginalised position. In fact ethnicity in general is a subject that seems to be avoided in church. This means that they are not part of one of the main religious groups and it is religion that for most people defines their ethnic identity. I have tried to write about one of the small sections of society in which there is some reason for hope.

would be a premature conclusion that the reconciliation process does not play any role in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. In this way prejudices can be overcome and people can start building relationships with people from other groups. outside of church activities ethnicity does play a role in the life of evangelical Christians. This ethnic mix is possible because issues of ethnicity are intentionally avoided. Reconciliation is not one of the main objectives of the Evangelical Church. One of the reasons for this is that it is not easy to find matters of common interest. However. Many of these efforts are fruitless. In Mostar much effort is put into creating places where Muslims and Croats can meet. People’s social life is often strongly influenced by one’s ethnic background.However. but in order to worship their God. A safe environment is created for people from all different ethnic groups by largely avoiding issues concerning ethnicity. They benefit from coming to church in various ways.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 177 Church he is expected to replace some of his ethnic identity by an evangelical Christian identity. Reconciliation is too much a political issue and the church does not want to be involved in political matters. The intended role of reconciliation might be minimal but in the Evangelical Church reconciliation between people does take place. The church does not have any strategies to reconcile people from different ethnic groups. This makes integration a very difficult objective.The first objective of the church is to reach people with its message about Jesus. First of all they find a strong community. not with the objective of overcoming the division that is so present in Mostar. People from different ethnic background come together. The conflict in Mostar has created two groups that have no urgent need to interact. Many of the people . Building bridges across the gap between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats does not happen overnight. Reconciliation is a process that needs a lot of time. By joining the Evangelical Church one becomes a citizen of a heavenly kingdom. The people who come to church have common interests in going to church. A Bosnian Muslim can live his whole life in East Mostar and a Bosnian Croat has no need to go to East Mostar. yet in a more unplanned way.

Thirdly. people’s convictions change. The integration of ethnic groups in the church is an unintended spin-off effect of the church. Church provides a local community and furthermore. By becoming part of the church they acquire a place in a strong network. Being part of such a community gives otherwise marginalised people a strong sense of belonging. material aid or a change of convictions and these people are present in every ethnic group in Mostar. Many of them do not fit automatically in one of the main groups in Mostar. When a person joins a religious group this has an effect on his personal system of meaning making. Often people return to their own ethnic groups outside of church matters. Many of the people in church come from a poor and powerless background. the church is part of a trans-national network. People start to build relationships with people from different ethnic backgrounds. So far the effect of the church on the rest of Mostar is relatively small. N° 9 who come to church would otherwise be marginalised. Evangelical Christianity gives people very clear goals in life and it gives people hope for a better future. People are often unaware of the social conditions that have an impact on the choices they make. I defined religion as part of the total framework of systems of meaning making. However . Secondly people benefit in material ways from being part of the church. From this perspective it may seem like people join the church in a very calculating way. It is especially attractive for those people who are in need of a strong community. The presence of foreign aid workers in church is something church people often benefit from in a direct way.178 Teoloãki åasopis. in the process of becoming part of a church. Maybe this will slowly change in the future when stronger relationships are being built among church people. These benefits attract people from all different ethnic background. This explains the ethnic diversity in church. Being part of a network offers people very practical opportunities. Maybe reconciliation should become an intentional objective for the church. However this is still a slow process and the integration does not stretch far beyond church activities. This integration creates good ground for reconciliation. I do not think that is the case.

Bibliography Appadurai.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 179 in some ways it could serve as a model for many organisations who try to reconcile people in Mostar. (ed. 1999 The Multicultural Riddle. 1999 Certainty: Ethnic Violence in the Era of Globalization. P. Rethinking National. and Geschiere P. In: Meyer. In: Goddard. and Violence in Rural Bosnia Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. 1966 The social Construction of Reality New York: Anchor Books. 41-56. Bose. J. 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities. Oxford: Berg. Bax. Nationalist Partition and International Intervention London: Hurst and Company. Boissevain. Ethnic. pp. Baumann. Berger. P. The Anthropology of Europe.L. A. 2002 Bosnia after Dayton. and Luckmann. (eds. and Religious Identities London: Routledge.). V. 1995 Medjugorje: Religion Politics. . Th.) 1994. G. A. Globalization and Identity Oxford: Blackwell. pp. Berger. B. 305-324. S. 1967 The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion New York: Doubleday. M.L.

(ed. 2006 Mostar’s little dragon. Eriksen. A. and Sheppard. Lambek. and Marie Friedmann Marquardt 2003 Globalizing the Sacred.com/archives/2006/04/01/mostars-littledragon. Kelly. York: Basic Books. 1995 Being Muslim the Bosnian way. R.180 Teoloãki åasopis. L. . Manuel A. D. H. Faking Democracy after Dayton London: Pluto Press. 2002 Ethnicity and Nationalism London: Pluto Press. 1995 The protean self: human resilience in an age of fragmentation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. April 2006. M. N° 9 Bringa.) 2002 A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Zaitchik. URL:http://reason. T. J. Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village. 1995 Miracle in Mostar Oxford: Lion Publishing. Vásquez. Chandler. T. Lifton. (1995). Religion across the Americas London: Rutgers University Press. 2000 Bosnia. G.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 181 .

182 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 PREGLEDNI RADOVI .

Yelchaninov’s designation). “There are no commonplace. non-religious matters: The ‘Christian outlook’ is one whole. God is and forever will remain beyond us— incomprehensible. In himself.”1 Fr. and of all things visible and invisible. you Orthodox—here in Serbia and in other Eastern European countries—have a new opportunity to influence your society with your rich heritage.96"20" Primljeno: 25. And within it.2010 Pregledni Ålanak An Orthodox World View For Life In The 21 .” God made but is utterly different from his creation. incomparable. society. thought. in the words of the Nicene Creed. education. Let us now consider briefly your Orthodox “Christian outlook” (to borrow Fr. with the collapse of Communist restrictions and the opportunity to live as God’s faithful in freedom. and all vocations. This is not so only because we are finite: it is because he is transcendent. Yelchaninov recognized that Orthodoxy’s worldview includes the whole of creation. All else came into being only by his creative activity.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dr.. that God Almighty is “Maker of heaven and earth... and ineffable.C e n t u r y In this 21st century. Even our recognition of our limitations in speaking of him can only be . all matters are seen in their spiritual dimensions and significance.03. Jim Payton 183 UDK 281. or anything else. but nothing in that creation is on a continuum with him: God is not the “ultimate” member in a chain of being. Orthodoxy confesses.03. One of the renowned Russian Orthodox leaders of the past recognized this Orthodox potential: Father Alexander Yelchaninov said.2010 Prihvañeno: 30.

and has its being. life. Orthodoxy stresses that God made the creation dynamic. But it still had to develop. Gregory of Nyssa and St. but only in him. God is nearer to his creation than we can grasp.6 As both St. human beings participated in both realms. Humanity was to serve as priests. in his energies. is utterly transcendent is. and God had built into all creation the potential with which it should develop.7 As God’s image-bearers. to God’s praise.5 The cosmos only had meaning. God made human beings as the only creatures who would share equally in both the realms of creation—in the words of the Nicene Creed. By using the gifts God had given them as his image-bearers. it was true also for humanity.184 Teoloãki åasopis.” as God pronounced it at the end of his creative work. in its future development. This was true for all of creation. Composed of body and soul.9 since it was complete and harmonious. who enjoyed a special place in the creation. God is beyond even our awareness that he is beyond us.8 to bring out the fullness of its potential to the glory of God. in philosophical terminology. John of Damascus taught. Orthodoxy—fol- .2 And yet. “the visible and the invisible”. moves.3 While what he created was utterly different from the Creator. the material and the immaterial. and future in the God who made and sustained it. N° 9 couched in thoughts and terms derived from our created human intellectual capacities. that Creator nevertheless was the one in whom the entire creation “lives. It was “very good. they were positioned at the intersection of everything else in creation and called to work with that creation. human beings were placed in the Garden of Eden.”4 God did not make the creation self-sustaining: it could have no life in itself. they were even more greatly privileged to bear the image of God. absolutely immanent. in his essence. Gregory Palamas has reminded us. as St. humans were to manifest the greatness of God’s creation by bringing to light and fruition all that God had prepared the creation to become. while human beings were greatly privileged to be thus the only microcosm of all the rest of creation. In stark contrast to ancient Greek philosophy’s endorsement of the eternally static and unchanging as the ultimate good. The one who. offering all the wonders of creation. under the leadership of his human vice-regents.

all to the glory of the Creator. and the environment with little thought for its development and more for our advantage (in power. we have been attracted by what serves our fleeting temporal existence. Adam and Eve. Basil the Great and St. our first parents—and their descendants. they fell into death. intending it to unfold into the sweep of subsequent history. the second person of the Trinity. sought a short-cut to that likeness: heeding the suggestion of the tempter.16 God’s Son. but the divine one. as one of their descendants.12 In so doing. or possessions). we have misused the rest of creation for our own benefit—in government. Dependent on him—as was all of the rest of creation—humanity was to deepen its commitment to him in lives of joy. Seeking the most of our brief life. and stewardly manner with everything else in creation. and humanity was to lead it progressively in that development. and love: created in the divine image. becoming more deeply committed to their God and increasingly aware of his greatness and his love toward his creation. bringing out all its latent possibilities. service.13 Through subsequent human history.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 185 lowing the teaching of St. down through history—were to work in a gentle. In dependence on and faithful communion with God.11 But our first parents. he fulfilled that promise and sent not only a human son. they looked to the creation rather than to the Creator for what they needed. loving. and took their descendants with them. This task would not be completed in only a few days or years: the God who had made all things also created time. they were to acquire the divine likeness as they served and communed with God. depending thus on what had no life in itself. The creation should develop over time. a champion who would overcome evil.14 The garden has become a desert. In so doing. rather than drawing near to the One for whose fellowship we were created but whose eternal existence is beyond our comprehension. Maximos Confessor10—urges that the “ultimate good” for creation is its God-given dynamism. . influence. and we have filled our mouths with sand. God promised our fallen first parents that he would send. they tried to become like God by eating the forbidden fruit. human beings would themselves develop. in which everything is always in process of change and development. society.15 Eventually.

The resurrected Christ summons us to enter into the fullness of our humanity in this life. John Chrysostom long ago spoke about this as “the liturgy after the liturgy. God—who alone has life in himself—broke the stranglehold of death on humanity. in this life and on this earth. The opportunities of serving him in this life are as unlimited as the vastness of creation and its manifold potential. and the devil—to free us to live unto God in the present life. Much more could be said in sketching out the riches of an Orthodox worldview. in his resurrection. to live up to humanity’s original calling—every day. but I trust that what we have considered is sufficient to indicate its broad contours. Christ yielded to what had no power over him. Alexander Schmemann urges. Let me now briefly suggest three implications of this worldview for life in the 21st century. since in the incarnation God established a bridge between himself as Creator and his creation. But. in order to break its power over others.”17 The incarnation was not only a rescue operation for fallen human beings. as the Orthodox liturgist Fr. N° 9 took humanity unto himself in the incarnation. If any of this strikes you as new. the divine Son became all that the first man was called to be—faithful to God and devoted to him through all his life.18 All this Orthodoxy celebrates in the gathering of the church. We are called anew to the task given our first parents: we are to give ourselves freely and fully to work in and develop all of creation—a creation now redeemed in Jesus Christ20—to God’s glory. in taking upon himself the death Adam had brought into the world. and the Eucharist. its liturgy. death. on this earth. Orthodox worship rightly understood impels the faithful to vigorous Christian action in the world. In uniting humanity and deity. though: it offered hope for all of creation. he overcame humanity’s enemies—sin. in all they do.” In Jesus Christ human beings are freed and enabled. and “the Word became flesh. Perhaps you who are Orthodox already recognize all I will say.186 Teoloãki åasopis. I can only beg your indulgence.19 St. since I have not found these matters discussed anywhere in the Orthodox literature available to me. in coming as fully human. I claim no originality for it: I am only trying to think with . if so.

but engaging in the work of ongoing explorations and reflections which will enhance what we may learn about the cosmos. no function of interpersonal society—which is secular. he remains ever transcendent. consequently. we are always encountering the divine energies: keeping him in mind is. no section of life. the sciences. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would encourage all the faithful to develop their potential for God’s service as his image-bearers and vice-regents. He has set us free to resume our human task of developing culture. Secondly. and in all places. In the first place. all to God’s glory. redeemed and restored in Christ. Whatever advances we or others may achieve in any field of endeavor—in culture. Whatever humankind may manage to develop. medicine. an inescapable responsibility in faithfully learning. we will be working with the still rich potential God built into the “all things visible and invisible” which he created. and he calls his image-bearers to develop that creation to its full potential. Thirdly. business. technology.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 187 you through the implications of your worldview for life in the present day. The privilege of serving the resurrected Christ is not restricted to priests and monks: human beings can serve him in all legitimate occupations. literature. all that can be studied comes from God’s creative activity. music. sport. we must honor both God’s essence and his energies. Even so. art. science. consequently. government. politics. We examine what we now know of that creation and seek ways to develop both our knowledge and that creation further. As we live. needs to be studied and taught as his. His dynamic creation has built into it all the possibilities that God intends for it. In all our labors and learning. or whatever—are the exploration and elucidation of what God placed within the creation. depends on him—and. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would embrace the wide diversity of God’s manifold creation. economics. All comes from him. as we learn (whether in school or by experience). in every day. Responsible life before God implies not only passing on what has already been learned. from an Orthodox perspective. God’s creation and his calling on our lives encourage us to engage in such exploration. . There is nothing—no realm of scholarship.

we can honor Christ in all areas of life. Thank you.188 Teoloãki åasopis. from an Orthodox perspective. as chemists or homemakers. I pray this will transpire among the Orthodox faithful here in Serbia in the 21st century. . as leaders in society or as followers. as medical researchers or politicians. taking their place in our human task of unfolding the riches of that creation to the praise of its Creator. Thus. as political scientists or factory workers. N° 9 and everything else out of what God had prepared his magnificent creation to become. An Orthodox worldview has the potential to invigorate and stimulate the faithful today to become all God has made them to be. Human beings now can honor Christ the Creator and Redeemer by becoming fully all he has gifted them to be—as historians or electricians.

256. during the course of the Hesychast controversy. St. 2d ed. and Oratio 45:7. This understanding of humanity is presented by St. A Study of Gregory Palamas. the treatment in John Meyendorff. and St. Basil the Great. Gregory the Theologian. Gregory Palamas. Maximos Confessor all made wide use of it. John of Damascus. The essence/energies distinction was common among the ancient Greek fathers: St. New York: St. on the basis of Genesis 1:26-27. Gregory of Nyssa (De Opificio Hominis. Fedotov. as cited in George P. 1988). George Lawrence (Crestwood. 1974). see also the somewhat broader treatment in his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press. 4.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 189 NOTES 1. St. 7. Gregory of Nyssa. John of Damascus (The Orthodox Faith 2:12) urged this. cf. 5. 2:3. St. Gregory Palamas had occasion to emphasize it. and St. and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being. De variis difficilibus locis.8. Fr. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 1:3. Cf the declaration of St.. John the Theologian: “All things came into being through him [the Logos]. 3.19. 6. trans. 206-207. 11-14. In him was life (John l:3-4a). Acts 17:28. The Orthodox Faith 2:12. St. . The Triads. 16) and St. Maximos Confessor. 2. St. Alexander Yelchaninov. 1974). Oratio 38: 11. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (Fadux: Btichervertriebsansalt.

it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). 60. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. male and female he created them. Ch. 43). 10. “The first man brought in universal death” (Catechesis 13:2). and over all the wild animals of the earth. image was understood as given in creation. 12. “We receive mortality from him [Adam]” (Questions and Answers. and he ate" (Genesis 2:16-17. and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth..’ So God created humankind in his image. according to our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26). but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat.. and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth’” (Genesis 1:26-28). Anastasius of Sinai said. “But the serpent said to the woman. According to St. and over the cattle. and indeed. for in the day that you eat of it you shall die’”. according to our likeness. ‘Be fruitful and multiply. Cyril of Jerusalem. ‘You will not die: for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God’”. St. “Then God said. 3:4-6). ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. Homily 5. and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea.. and over the birds of the air. 2 above). and she also gave some to her husband. 13.. but likeness was understood to be the goal toward which human beings were to develop. and fill the earth and subdue it.. in the same vein. 11. St. in the image of God he created them. Byzantine Theology (as in n. who was with her. N° 9 8. cf. “God saw everything that he had made. 9. the discussion in John Meyendorff. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. “And the Lord God commanded the man. Maximos Confessor agrees with these senti- . 132-134.190 Teoloãki åasopis. “Then God said.. Maximos Confessor argued it in Adversus Thallassium. among the Greek fathers. She took of its fruit and ate. St. God blessed them and God said to them. Basil the Great taught this in his Hexaemeron.

. As well. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 7 above). and St. Cyril of Alexandria. his Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Crestwood. he repeatedly urges that Orthodox worship should drive the faithful out into the world to engage in service (e. 1973). “I will put enmity between you [the serpent]and the woman.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 191 ments (cf. John Meyendorff summarizes the consensus of the ancient Greek fathers and subsequent Byzantine Orthodox leaders on these points. in this work. 18. St. The above summarizes the views of St. 14. Gregory the Theologian. Fr. John Meyendorff has argued that nothing in Orthodoxy. cf. and virtually all the ancient Greek fathers on the accomplishment of redemption by the incarnate Son of God. specifically citing St. Paul wrote that “When the fullness of time had come. Theodore of Mopsuestia. he will strike your head. God sent his Son. In his Byzantine Theology (as in n. 100. his Quaestiones ad Thalassium). Theodoret of Cyprus. 17. Maximos Confessor. would lead to neglect of contemporary issues and problems: cf. as do virtually all the Greek fathers.g. Gregory Palamas (144-145). Schmemann frequently deals with worldview issues as he treats Orthodox worship and sacraments in his For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy (Crestwood. 123. . New Jersey: St. St. and between your offspring and hers. God declared. 16. 96-107. Irenaeus. rightly understood. 1989). New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 15. 19. John Chrysostom. John 1:14. his argument at 21. and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15). Theophylact of Ohrid. 113. born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). 134). St. In response to what had transpired.

“Redemption is a wondrous reality. “A few drops of blood make the universe whole again” (patristic source not given). Vladimir’s Seminary Press.192 Teoloãki åasopis. Gregory the Theologian. Vladimir Lossky urges. in confirmation of this. N° 9 In his Orthodox Theology: An Introduction (Crestwood. Lossky cites the statement by St. which extends across the entire cosmos” (114). New Jersey: St. 1978). .

Likewise.08 Twelve Steps In The Exegesis Of The Acts 15:22-29 The exegetical method utilized in this study is the “Twelve Steps in the Exegesis of a Paragraph. 10. 1 1. The Acts 15:22-29 passage immediately follows the concluding speech of James (15:13-21). ecclesiological and missiological) background . geographical. By the linking word 1 See Van Engen 1998. The purpose of the exegesis of Acts 15:22-29 is to listen the text itself . Definition of the Passage The Acts 15:22-29 passage is the integral part of . the introductory sentence of the Second Missionary Journey. This is obvious. by which Luke has ended his report of the First Missionary Journey.what I would entitled . in this case. the typical summary statement. .which. Acts 15:35 is the typical summary statement .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dimitrije Popadiñ 193 UDK 22.” recommended by Charles Van Engen. cultural.that followed the Acts 14:28. is opening up a new topic (controversial question related to circumcision that ruined Jewish/Gentile Christian relationship) .to interpret the text (with respect to the selected prominent commentaries) and to understand areas and principles of its implications. since Acts 15:1 is a typical introductory sentence .by which Luke has wrapped it up the positive outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem Council that is followed by Acts 15:36.in the light of both its immediate and broad biblical context and its multifaceted (historical. theological.the Jerusalem Council event: Acts 15:1-35.

3.versus Acts alone . again. Within the gospel of Luke.since it is part of Luke’s one -though two volumes .work. which could be seen as the preparation for the Second Coming of Christ). could be considered as a preparation for Acts (and the Acts as the preparation for the mission of the Church.194 Teoloãki åasopis. as a whole. which is the preparation for mission. and in terms of the grater potential to geographically spread away from the center (Jerusalem). the preparation for His dead and resurrection. Textual Variation The most significant textual variation of the Acts 15:22-29 passage has to do with the phrase: kai tou pniktou (“and what is stran- . the writer is “leaving” the Jerusalem Council .both. as the geographical place (verse 30 follows the events in Antioch) and as the event (the meeting of the apostles and the church) by citing the letter-conclusion of the Council. which is the preparation for His ascension. 23) and by the other “border-passage-verse. Gospel of Luke. the Acts 15: is the preparation for the new level of the cross cultural mission both in terms of the more explicit definition of the content of the message (the gospel is “free” from “burdens” of the Jewish culture). Acts 15:22-29 is the sequence of the Acts 15:1-35. Within the Acts. Acts 15:1-35) as the preparation for the new level of the cross-cultural mission.” (29). but it is a passage with its own identity: it carries the contents of the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council. Accordingly. Thus. In this perspective. which is. N° 9 “Then” (22) the writer begin to presents the corporate decision of the Council and the action taken by it (“chose… wrote a letter and sent…” 22. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Luke/Acts Acts 15:22-29 passage has to be considered in its relationship with Luke/Acts . the prologue is the preparation for the teaching and the ministry of Jesus. the prologue is the preparation for the coming of the Spirit. 2. I can recognize this passage (with its immediate context.

understood by the Western authorities as ethical in nature . . Thus. 2. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Related Scriptures Simon Peter has learned a significant lessons (Lk 15:11-32 and Acts 10:1-48) which have undermined his ethnocentrism and help him to understand the non-legalistic nature of God’s message of salvation. most probably because of the strict language of the Leviticus 17 and 18. for example. the controversial demand for the circumcision lied upon the Gentles. and 4. and its four -prohibitions (1. things sacrificed to idols. Tannehill 1998. 3. Even though the Jerusalem Council has made clear that the circumcision is not required for salvation (and Paul’s writing emphases the primacy of the circumcision of the hearth). which has been omitted in Western text of the Codex Bezae (D) and the Harclean Syriac (apparatus). Robert Tannehill explains that the reason for such. is Paul’s compassion for the concern of the Jewish Christians that “as Gentiles become the majority within the church”.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 195 gled”). fornication) Apostolic Decree . 2 4. things sacrificed to idols. fornication) Apostolic Decree that is understood by its authorities as a ceremonial in nature. a Jew).stands in contrast with the Egyptian or Alexandrian text found in the Codex Vaticanus (B). they “might then have to choose withdrawal into isolation or ‘apostasy from Moses. 11. particularly 17:10. blood and 3. since it takes into the consideration Jewish feelings about the outward behavior of the 3 2 3 See Smith 1919. he (as well as James in that regard) has considered being a “yoke” (10). However. and Tertullian in the early third century). 2. apparently contradictory act. things strangled. This three-prohibitions ( 1. a special warning regarding the restriction of eating any manner of blood have needed to be enclosed with the final decision of the Jerusalem Council.’” This concern is build in the Jerusalem Decree (proposed by James. 191. (also confirmed by Irenaeus in the second. we see Paul affirming Timothy’s circumcision. blood.

) 6. verse 4.especially to the rite of circumcision . “emphasize the church’s role as the vehicle of the Spirit. (Given place. “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit. 4 5 Bruce 1983. Geographical and Historical Setting The Jerusalem Council took place in the Church in Jerusalem. and thus it is determined by them. 315. I am impressed by the careful construction of the letter. N° 9 growing community of Gentles. wherever the Church have had its regular meetings. Marshall 1983. are not under the submission to the Jewish law . apostles and elders assembled for the meeting. versus 12 and 22). Literal Features of the Acts 15:22-29 The words. (Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem. I will not discuss this issue. In short. The Major Theme of Acts 15:22-29 The Church in Jerusalem has made an authoritative decision that the Gentiles. The decision is an authoritative one since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The time of the Jerusalem Council falls in between the First and the Second Missionary Journeys.” 4 5 7. 5. and the whole congregation was present.” and there is no parallel for such a phrase. thus.196 Teoloãki åasopis.but they should only “abstain from sacrifices offered to idols and from blood and from animals strangled and from fornication:” (verse 29). the Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features and. verse 7. you don’t have to circumsize. and it is made by the “original” church established by Christ. by accepting the Gospel of Grace. where His apostles are the ministers and from where the gospel was spread all over. by which Luke is wrapping up the decision of the Council. regarding which “some critics claim that it is a literary composition by Luke himself. Furthermore. 255. and to us” (verse 28). which are now consisting the Church. .

in that discloses organization of the early Church in terms of the role of the apostles. Judah and Silas (27). • The only exceptions has to do with the idols. in that reveals the direct involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s leadership and the decision making in general and. • We are confirming Paul and Barnabas (25. There are two categories of the people: the senders of the letter. elders . by a council. to confirmed that. The “Outline” of the Theme of Acts 15:22-29 I see the “outline” of the support of the main theme of Acts 15:22-29 as following: • The Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features • The Jews that “upset your souls” (24) were not our representatives. The People Involved in Acts 15:22-29 All of the people mentioned in this passage are listed in the 22 and the 23 verse. blood and fornication (29). 26) [and their opinion]. and the recipients. one which relates to the expansion of the Christian faith cross-culturally. apostles. ecclesiological and missiological contribution of the passage are obvious. we are in agreement with the Holy Spirit (28). in particular. together with the Paul and Barnabas (verse 22). 9. The Main Theological Concept of Acts 15:22-29 The pneumatological.including Judah (who is called Barsabas) and Silas.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 197 8. Pneumatological. “to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.and the whole [Jerusalem] church. Missiological contribution of this passage is that clarifies the church’s understanding of the cross-cultural characteristic of the Gospel (because it is supra-cul- . Ecclesiological.g. • In that. elders and the congregation and the way of solving the church’s controversies e.” (verse 23). • We are sending you our elders. nd rd 10. “who were leaders among the brethren” .

198 Teoloãki åasopis. ecclesiological and missiological implications. Holy Spirit lead and inspired . Conclusions in the Light of the Prominent Commentaries Verse 22. Acts 15:22-29 has theological. to know how to act when faced with the controversy. with an open-minded discussion of all participants. and it will consequently become a humane institution. The church in Jerusalem was well-organized. . If institutionalized. N° 9 tural in nature) and enables it to carry out the Great Commission with authenticity. Gathered for the sake of Christ. They acted decisively and they made a specific decisions regarding both what they decided about the controversy and how they would convey their decision.e. Without an active participation (or. the church would lose its God-given identity of being people of God. The Church is a properly ordered community. a church would create a platform for a fulfillment of God’s will. Furthermore.g. Implications Accordingly.” Verse 24. 11. 12. since there was no authorization. an organization that uses the means and methods of human secular societies. Harrison 1986.” 6 7 6 7 Kurnizgen 1966. better: leadership) of the Holy Spirit. task-oriented and delegating church. submitted to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 34. the nature of the church would determine the nature of its mission. If authentic . it will be a yoke that troubles peoples’ souls more then it helps. This is important. “The decision of the Council is put down in writing. In its letter. This passage is a lighthouse to a church at any time and any place. 253. Verse 23. the Council “carefully dissociated the Jerusalem church from those of their number who had made the demand contained in 15:1.it will be a blessing toward salvation to the recipients of the Gospel.

Josef 1966 The Acts of the Apostles. Harisson. 1. Polhill 1992. Kurnizgen.” 8 9 10 REFERENCES CITED Bruce. but also confirm by word of mouth what it contained. 1986 Acts: Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Academie Books Zondervan Publishing House.” “Verse 29 lists the four provisions of the apostolic decree just as originally proposed by James (v. Vol.27. Everett F. The leaders (apostles and elders) and the assembly (whole Jerusalem church) “are included in the pronoun us. 1986 Interpreting Acts: The Expanding Church. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House. . Krodel. They would not only deliver the letter. 251.Eerdmans Publishing Company. The Council “made it abundantly clear that the men they had now agreed to choose…and send… did have their full approval and support. Krodel 1986. 335. while the Holy Spirit functions as the chief authority to which the church and its leaders give their agreement. Grand Rapids: William B. 8 9 10 Stott 1990. New York: Herder and Herder. F. 288.” Verse 28. 1983 Commentary on the Book of the Acts. 20). Gerhard A.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 199 Verse 25 .

Van Engen. John R. Leicester. Robert 1998 The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts A Literary Interpretation. Polhill. W.200 Teoloãki åasopis. John B. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Neshville: Broadman Press. I. Tannehill. Howard 1983 The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary. David 1919 The Life and Letters of St. . 1992 The New American Commentary: Acts. Fuller Theological Seminary. New York: Doran. England: Inter-Varsity Press and Grand Rapids: William B.” MT 523 Course Description and Syllabus. Smith. N° 9 Marshall. Charles 1998 “The Holy Spirit and Mission in Luke/Acts. Paul. Vol 2. Mineapolis: Fortress Press. 1990 The Spirit the Church and the World: The Message of Acts. Stott. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

teoloãke. . i to prema uputima profesora Åarlsa Van Engena. kulturne. i to u svom uæem i ãirem biblijskom kontekstu i u svetlu njegove viãeslojne (istorijske. eklesioloãke i misioloãke) pozadine. tumaåenje teksta s osvrtom na odabrane priznate komentare. Svrha egzegeze ovoga odlomka jeste „sluãanje“ samoga teksta. geografske. i identifikovanje i razumevanje odreœenih oblasti i principa primene ovoga teksta.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 201 Rezime U ovom ålanku autor predstavlja dvanaest koraka procesa egzegeze svetopisamskog teksta opisa Jerusalimskog sabora (Dela 15:22-29).

202 STRUÅNI RAD .

da li je moæda ta bolest samo rezultat ljudske nemarnosti za oåuvanjem sopstvenog zdravlja? Verujem da mnogi hriãñani.03. danas. Kada su u pitanju uzroci bolesti. Neki pokuãavaju da shvate smisao bolesti. koji je bio slep od roœenja. Meœutim. Petar Piliñ UDK 234. Oni su smatrali da je u pitanju bio greh. ili njegovi roditelji pa se slep rodio?” (Jovan 9:1-3). a i mnogi drugi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 203 Dipl. teol.net ) Duhovni aspekti bolesti Biblijska perspektiva Rezime Pre oko dve hiljade godina Isus je prolazio sa svojim uåenicima pored jednog slepca. Meœutim. ljudi se i danas pitaju zaãto ih takav bol. kada govorim o duhovnim aspektima bolesti æelim naglaãenije govoriti o postavci Isusa i njegovih .predavaå za predmete Primljeno: 22. U ovom radu bih hteo prvo da kaæem neãto o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. æele odgovor na ovo pitanje kao i Hristovi uåenici u ono vreme.02. pitanja mogu biti postavljena na sledeñi naåin: da li je neko ljudsko biñe bolesno zbog posledice greha? Da li je to ljudsko biñe moæda bolesno zato ãto ga je Sotona hteo iskuãati kao Jova? Ili. Prihvañeno: 01. ko je zgreãio.23:616 Asistent . Zato su i postavili takvo pitanje.2010 Hriãñanska etika i duãebriæniãtvo Pregledni ålanak Protestantski Teoloãki Fakultet u Novom Sadu Pastor Hriãñanske Baptistiåke Crkve u Novom Sadu ( pilicnip@nspoint.2010 Svetske religije. patnja ili kazna snalazi. zaãto dolazi do bolesti. Isusovi uåenici su znatiæeljno postavili svom uåitelju jedno vaæno pitanje: “ravi. on.

Bog se brinuo za zdravlje svog naroda ali narod je trebao da mu bude posluãan. isceljenje. jer sam ja Gospod. Smatram da u Njegovim i njihovim postavkama leæi smisao. i ako prigneã uho k zapovijestima njegovijem i uãåuvaã sve uredbe njegove. U Starom zavetu. nakon ãto su se pokajali. Bolest je u Starom zavetu bila Boæija kazna za neposluãnost. Bog je rekao svom narodu: “Ako dobro uzasluãaã glas Gospoda Boga svojega. 1. Avimelek je poslao svoje sluge . ali takoœe i puãta bolest na åoveka (Pnz. Pokajanje je bilo put ka ozdravljenju. Zato. Neki od njih. u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. i kako bi trebali i danas. Bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja Bog je onaj koji daje zdravlje åoveku. Zatim. pogotovo za pripadnike izabranog naroda. na prvom mestu o bolestima. 32:39). æelim da vidim i kako su se Njegovi uåenici postavljali u sliånim situacijama. U knjizi Izlazak u petnaestom poglavlju u dvadesetãestom stihu. demoni. nijedne bolesti koju sam pustio na Misir neñu pustiti na tebe. Avram je govorio za svoju æenu Saru da mu je sestra.204 Teoloãki åasopis. lekar tvoj”. ponovo zdravi. greh. Åovek je u Boæijim rukama i niko i niãta ne moæe izbaviti åoveka iz njegovih ruku jer je Bog åovekov Stvoritelj. zato ãto je On moj Spasitelj. Isus Hristos. N° 9 uåenika prema bolestima. Saznavãi za Saru. Novi zavet. æelim da vidim kako se Isus postavljao u takvim sluåajevima. Da bismo imali ãto jasniju sliku o bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja potrebno je analizirati nekoliko starozavetnih tekstova koji govore o takvim dogaœajima. i uåiniã ãto je pravo u oåima njegovijem. reãenje i uteha u pogledu ljudskih bolesti kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Postanak 20 .su bili isceljeni. apostoli. Pronaãao sam åetiri teksta koja ñu koristiti za ovu analizu. bolest.dogaœaj koji govori o Boæijoj kazni za Avimeleka i njegovom pomilovanju. Uåitelj i Gospod. Bog je dao åoveku jedan uslov koji ñe mu sigurno obezbediti zdravlje. Bolesni ljudi su morali da se pokaju i da mole Boga za oproãtenje da bi ozdravili. Kljuåne reåi: Stari zavet.

pomolio se za Marijino isceljenje i Bog mu je rekao da ñe ona biti za sedam dana zdrava i da se onda moæe vratiti nazad u narod. videlo se da se njegov gnev spustio na Mariju jer je ona bila gubava. i æivot njegove porodice. da bi åovek ozdravio. a zatim da se za njega pomoli Boæiji åovek ili prorok. zato mu je Bog dao uslov. Meœutim. Bog je. ko bude posluãan biñe blagosloven. Ono ãto je bilo potrebno da bi Marija bila isceljena je . Boæiji åovek. prvo trebao da se pokaje za uåinjeni greh/grehe. Gospod je pozvao Mariju. Kada je Bog otiãao iz ãatora od sastanka. Trebao je da vrati Saru Avramu i da se Avram pomoli za njega jer je Avram prorok. Dakle. vratio je Saru Avramu i joã mu je dao mnoge darove. Avimelek je ispunio Boæiji uslov. Zbog Avramovog kukaviåluka. Dakle iz ovog primera moæemo videti da je u starozavetno doba. Meœutim. Videvãi Mariju. u starozavetno doba. a zatim je Mariji i Aronu rekao da su uåinili greh gunœajuñi protiv Mojsija kao njegovog proroka sa kojim on razgovara lice u lice. Aron se pokajao i zamolio Mojsija da moli Boga za Marijino isceljenje. i to se i dogodilo.govori o Boæijoj kazni za Mariju koja je gunœala protiv Mojsija kao Boæijeg proroka. Marija i Aron su gunœali protiv Mojsija jer im se nije svidelo ãto je uzeo æenu Madijanku. U Starom zavetu je vaæilo pravilo: ko zgreãi biñe kaænjen. kao kaznu za greh davao bolest koja je vodila u smrt. Avimelek je to uåinio iz neznanja. Avram se pomolio da Bog isceli Avimeleka i ceo njegov dom. Brojevi 12 . i da ñe zbog toga Avimelek poginuti. ako izvrãi moæe da ozdravi i ostane æiv.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 205 da mu je dovedu za æenu. neposluãnost. Boæiji åovek. Inaåe. 2. bila je bela kao sneg. Arona i Mojsija da doœu u ãator od sastanka. Bog je rekao Avimeleku u snu da je uåinio zlo jer je uzeo æenu koja ima muæa. Gospoda Boga je ovo gunœanje naljutilo. bolest je i u ovom sluåaju bila kazna za greh. Stari zavet nije baã poznat po milosti. koji. Oni su smatrali da Gospod ne govori samo preko Mojsija. Mojsije. u ovom primeru Bog se smilovao na Avimeleka i dao mu uslov od åijeg je ispunjenja zavisio njegov.

Znaåi. Isus je sebe uporedio sa ovom zmijom koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao da bi je svi videli. Narod Izraelski se spasao pogledom vere u zmiju koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao. 4. N° 9 pokajanje i molitva proroka. Boæijeg åoveka. Izraelci su se bunili protiv Boga i Mojsija zbog toga ãto su ih izveli iz Misira. Isaija 38:1-5. 21 . za bolesnu osobu. i preko proroka Isaije mu poruåio da ñe poæiveti joã petnaest godina. Kada se Jezekija smrtno razboleo doãao mu je prorok Isaija i preneo mu poruku od Gospoda da ñe umreti. bez milosti su umirali.govori o tome kako se Bog smilovao na ljude koji su gunœali protiv njega i dao Mojsiju reãenje od bolesti.206 Teoloãki åasopis. Isaija je rekao Jezekiji da uzme grudu suvih smokava i da stavi na mesto na kom je otok i da ñe tako ozdraviti. 3. i svako ko je verom pogledao u tu zmiju. Zato je Jezekija u suzama molio Gospoda da mu se smiluje i da mu da da poæivi joã nekoliko godina. Mojsije je napravio zmiju onakvu kakvu mu je Gospod zapovedio da napravi. Jezekija je bio veoma poboæan. pokajali su se ãto su gunœali i doãli su kod Mojsija moleñi ga da moli Gospoda da ukloni zmije od naroda.govori o Jezekijinoj smrtnoj bolesti i isceljenju te bolesti jer je Bog odluåio da Jezekija poæivi joã petnaest godina. Brojevi 21:5-9 . U protivnom. Mojsije se molio za to i Bog je sklonio zmije i rekao mu naåin na koji ñe ozdraviti oni koje su zmije ujele. bio je Bogu veran i celim srcem je åinio ono ãto je bilo Bogu ugodno. Gospod je åuo tu molitvu. . i zato ãto im se hleb ogadio. bilo je bitno da se oni pokaju za svoj greh. Meœutim. da bi se on pomolio za njih i njihovo ozdravljenje. smilovao se Jezekiji. Kada su ostali videli ãta se deãava. a nisu se pokajali i prihvatili Boæije reãenje za ozdravljenje. Jezekija je to posluãao i ozdravio je. Isus je govorio da ñe i on biti podignut kao i ova zmija i da ñe svako ko poveruje u Njega biti spaãen (Jovan 3:14). Gospod je to åuo pa je spustio svoj gnev na one koji su gunœali tako da je veliki broj ljudi pomreo od ujeda zmija. Inaåe. bio je ozdravljen. u ovom sluåaju za Mariju. a zatim da to kaæu Boæijem proroku. svi oni koje su ujedale zmije.

drugim reåima. Isusova sluæba je bila puna takvih dogaœaja. Bog je i u Starom zavetu imao milosti prema greãnima pa je. Bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja Novi zavet na mnogo mesta govori o bolestima i njihovim isceljenjima. On je posedovao tu silu i nije imao potrebu da se poziva na neki autoritet. To je i radio. Sveto pismo nam indirektno govori da je najznaåajnije videti kako se Isus postavljao prema bolestima. Iako nije jasno reåeno koji je bio uzrok Jezekijine bolesti. ipak bismo mogli pretpostaviti da su u pitanju bili gresi koje je ranije poåinio jer u sedamnaestom stihu Jezekija kaæe da je Gospod “bacio za leœa svoja sve grijehe moje”. Moguñe je da je i u ovom sluåaju greh bio uzrok bolesti. videti kako su koristili Isusov autoritet i njegovu moñ da bi iscelili bolesne. Isus je imao taj autoritet i narod je to primeñivao. kako je isceljivao bolesne tj. 4:36). bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja nam daju joã jasniju i bogatiju sliku o uzrocima i razlozima bolesti i naåinima isceljenja bolesnih od strane Isusa Hrista i njegovih uåenika. . Mislim da smo analizirajuñi ova åetiri primera dobili jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. bili ozdravljani. kako je koristio svoj autoritet i svoju moñ kada je isceljivao bolesne. Kada je isceljivao. Ali. 53). znaåajno je videti kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 207 Ovaj dogaœaj je Jezekija zapisao u svojoj knjizi (38:9-20). Nadalje. ta je sila izlazila iz Njega (Lk. ãta je radio. On je imao veliku moñ i ljudi su se zaprepaãñivali jer je åinio pred njima åuda isceljenja i izgonio demone (Lk. posledica greha. On je doãao da oslobodi suænje. Meœutim. 53:4). Isus i bolesti u evanœelju po Luki Za Isusa Hrista je najavljeno da ñe isceliti mnoge kada bude doãao na ovu zemlju (Is. Smatram da ñemo tada imati jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. Uglavnom je bolest bila kazna za greh. da bolesti naãe nosi i nemoñi naãe uzme (Is. Dakle. ukoliko su se bolesni pokajali i ukoliko se Boæiji åovek molio za njih. 8:46). U Luki 5:17 je zapisano da je Isus leåio silom Gospodnjom.

opraãtaju ti se gresi. trebalo je prvo oprostiti grehe. Isus je rekao ono ãto je moralo da se uradi. 39 – isceljenje Petrove taãte. Moris: 1983: str. Isus je doãao u Petrovu kuñu. Petrova taãta je bila bolesna. a tri ñu detaljnije analizirati. ali to ne implicira da je greh uzrok svaåije bolesti. Isusa je zadivila vera njegovih prijatelja. On to nije namerno uradio da bi se prepirao sa farisejima. Ovom bolesniku su bili potrebni ljudi koji bi ga nosili ako bi trebao negde da ode. odnosno da su svi bolesni kaænjeni jer su poåili mnogo greha. 24. Kod ovog bolesnika uzrok bolesti je na prvom mestu bio greh. 5:18-20. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. njegovi prijatelji su trebali imati veliku veru u Isusa da bi raskopali krov od kuñe i spustili bolesnika pred Isusa. 989. Manson smatra da “ono ãto je taj dogaœaj u prvom redu trebao istaknuti jeste upravo åinjenica da Isusov autoritet u podruåju vere poåinje opraãtanjem greha”. 1. imala je groznicu. sve ñu ih ukratko prokomentarisati.1 Reåi nisu bile izgovorene ali je sam åin bio nema molba. Petrova taãta je ustala zdrava i posluæivala ih je. Isus je video njihovu veru i ozdravio åoveka. veñ je to uradio da bi paralisani åovek mogao da bude isceljen. Isus je rekao: åoveåe. . 2. 25 – isceljenje uzetoga. Isus se nije osvrtao na njih iako je znao da su oni tu da bi ga uhvatili u pogreãci. 23. a ne o bolesti. Poãto je bila velika guæva. 115. Autoritativno se izraæavajuñi.3 Moæda neki smatraju da 1 2 3 Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. Isus se nagnuo nad njom i zapretio groznici. jer je to bilo reãenje.208 Teoloãki åasopis. 4:38. U ovoj situaciji su mu naroåito trebali ljudi koji bi ga odneli do Isusa. N° 9 U nastavku ñu navesti trinaest neposrednih Isusovih izleåenja bolesnih. Isusove prve reåi u ovom dogaœaju govore o grehu.2 Iako su tu bili prisutni fariseji.

da se ona mnogo namuåila dok se leåila kod lekara jer je to za Luku koji je i sam bio lekar bilo sasvim normalno da je ta æena tako prolazila. Ona je doæivljavala mnoge neugodnosti jer su je smatrali neåistom zbog krvarenja (Lev. na koje nije bilo odgovora. ujedno. Meœu njima su bile Marija Magdalena. 15:25). Luka nam ovde ne kaæe. pozvao Isusa da to uåini. Odeljak Lk. Ovaj tekst govori o Isusovim sledbenicama koje je Isus izleåio od zlih duhova i bolesti. kao ãto to evanœelista Marko kaæe. Kapetan rimske vojske je. 8:43-48 nam govori o isceljenju krvotoåive æene. Mislim da je to moguñe ali to ne mora da bude pravilo (Vidi Lk. Nekada bolesnici idu kod lekara i potroãe svoje imanje da bi bili izleåeni ali ne vredi. Jovana. Susana i mnoge druge koje ne spominju Evanœelja. Isus je reåju iscelio suvu ruku tom åoveku rekavãi: “pruæi svoju ruku”. Ljudima ne preostaje niãta drugo nego da pogledom vere gledaju na Onog koji je Lekar nad lekarima. 6:6-10 – isceljenje åoveka sa suvom rukom. 6. Kapetan je poruåio da je dovoljna samo jedn Isusova reå i njegov ñe sluga biti zdrav. verujuñi da Isus moæe isceliti njegovog slugu. ali mu je. Ovo ne znaåi da ljudi ne trebaju iñi kod lekara.4 Luka se usredsreœuje na samo isceljenje. 8:43-48 – isceljenje krvotoåive æene. Nakon jednog Isusovog pitanja. 7:1-10 – isceljenje kapetanovog sluge. . 13:1-5). poruåio da on nije dostojan da Isus uœe u njegovu kuñu niti da on sam doœe pred njega. Dok je Isus jedne subote uåio u sinagogi zapazio je åoveka sa suvom desnom rukom. Isus je bio zadivljen kapetanovom verom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 209 greh obavezno donosi neku bolest. Ova æena je iãla kod 4 Vidi: Moris: 1983: str. 5. 4. na Isusa. 160. 8:2-3 – Isus je isceljivao i nespomenute u Evanœeljima. 3. Zbog toga ãto je znao misli fariseja i knjiæevnika. pozvao je åoveka sa bolesnom rukom da stane na sredinu sinagoge. Tako je i bilo.

8. 35. vera joj je pomogla i bila je isceljena. veñ da je njena vera u Njega ta koja ju je iscelila. Dakle. N° 9 lekara ali nije vredelo. priãla mu je u veri æeleñi tajno da se dotakne Njega i bude isceljena. 52. Religiozne voœe su smatrale da je isceljenje lekarski posao. Sotona ju 5 6 7 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. stareãina sinagoge nije mogao da vidi dalje od propisane norme i da u ozdravljenju zgråene æene ugleda Isusovu samilost.7 Niãta ne upuñuje na pretpostavku da je ta æena verovala u Isusa. “kñeri. vera tvoja spasla te je.5 Naravno. a bavljenje takvim poslom na ãabat je bilo zabranjeno. Ona je bila Avramova kñer ali je njena bolest bila zla. zbog zakona (Lev. 995. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. posle svih neuspeha ona je doãla do Isusa. Nije hteo da to ostane samo izmeœu njih. Æeleo je da se ova æena predstavi i da joj da na znanje da njegova odeña nema nikakvo magiåno dejstvo. Isus je isterao demona iz nemog åoveka i åovek je progovorio. Isus je æeleo da ta æena da svedoåanstvo pred svima. 9. Ova æena koja nije mogla. Deåak je imao padavicu jer ga je neåisti duh bacao na zemlju. 15:27). Zato. priñi Isusu otvoreno. idi s mirom”. 13:10-13 – isceljena æena koja je 18 godina pogrbljena je moj treñi detaljniji primer koji koristim u ovoj analizi. 11:14 – izgoni demona i nemi progovara.210 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. .6 7. isti sluåaj moæe biti sa nekima od nas. 9:38-42 – isceljenje mladiña koji ima padavicu. Dok su deåaka dovodili Isusu demon je bacio deåaka na zemlju i poåeo da ga trza. Ovaj dogaœaj je narod zadivio a zavidne posmatraåe odveo u drugi ekstrem. U ovom stihu se govori o joã jednom primeru Isusove sile i autoriteta. Isus je silazio sa gore preobraæenja i naiãao na åoveka koji ga je zamolio da mu isceli sina. Isus je isterao neåistog duha i na taj naåin izleåio deåaka.

Slepac je. “Moæda Luka æeli reñi da je u tom trenutku ona veñ od tog duha (11) bila osloboœena (12). 14:1-4 – isceljenje åoveka koji ima vodenu bolest. 229. Jedan od njih je video da je izleåen. 22:50. 13.8 Isus je æenu proglasio isceljenom. Kada su prvosveãtenikove sluge doãle po Isusa da bi ga priveli. U ovih trinaest primera mogli smo videti Isusa i Njegovu postavku prema duhovnim aspektima bolesti. Isus se smilovao na slugu. Na putu za Jerihon Isus je prolazio pored jednog slepca. . komentariãuñi da ga je spasla njegova vera.9 10. Isusa je srelo deset gubavaca koji su izdaleka podigli glas molbe da se on smiluje na njih. uzroånika bolesti. Prilikom isterivanja demona. Kada su ga doveli do Isusa. Ova bolest je bila prouzrokovana demonom koji ju je dræao zgråenom. 1003. i dotaknuo njegovo uvo. Petar je napao prvosveãtenikovog slugu i odsekao mu je desno uvo. U toj kuñi je bio åovek koji je patio od vodene bolesti. Isus im je dao reå da ñe biti oåiãñeni na putu do sveãtenika kojima su trebali da se pokaæu. Na putu izmeœu Samarije i Galileje. Isus ga je izleåio dohvatom nakon neodgovorenog pitanja: “da li se sme subotom leåiti?” 11. Isus je jedne subote bio gost u kuñi farisejskog stareãine. 17:12-14 – isceljenje deset gubavaca. Isus uglavnom nije polagao ruke na bolesnike. te da je Isus samo dovrãio isceljenje”. slepac je zatraæio da Isus uåini da on progleda. Iscelio je slugino uvo bez da ga je sluga to zamolilo. videvãi ãta se deãava. Isus se smilovao nad njim i reåju ga izleåio. poloæio je svoje ruke na nju i ona se odmah ispravila. povikao iz sveg glasa da se Isus smiluje nad njim. 51 – isceljenje uva prvosveãtenikovog sluge. priãao mu. 18:35-43 – isceljenje jerihonskog slepca. Moris: 1983: str. 12. Mislim da su ovi primeri dovoljno pouåni da bismo ovo shvatili: Isus je Lekar nad 8 9 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. åuvãi da Isus prolazi. slavio je Boga i vratio se da zahvali Isusu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 211 je svezao.

u svim ovim primerima vidimo da je potrebna vera u Isusa Hrista. Apostol Petar i Jovan glavne su liånosti ovog dogaœaja. ovde se æelim osvrnuti na ãest dogaœaja apostolskih izleåenja bolesnih opisanih u ovoj knjizi.212 Teoloãki åasopis. treba da verujemo da Isus oåekuje da mi idemo kod lekara koji ñe nas izleåiti od bolesti koje nisu izazvane od strane neåistih sila veñ zbog naãe nemarnosti oko oåuvanja zdravlja. starosti ili nemoñi tela. nekada izgoni demone i isceljuje. zaista. da se dogode i åuda. mogu zatraæiti od Oca. ja ñu uåiniti” (Jovan 14:12-14. nekada opraãta grehe pa isceljuje. Apostoli i bolesti U ovom delu rada bih hteo da kaæem neãto o tome kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima i ãta su åinili po pitanju toga jer Isus je rekao uåenicima: “Zaista. N° 9 lekarima. verovati u Njegovu moñ isceljivanja. ko veruje u mene åiniñe dela koja ja åinim. kada govorimo o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja ne smemo izostaviti apostole (uåenike Hristove) i njihove postavke prema bolestima. 14:12-14). verujuñi u Njegovo ime. åetiri ñu analizirati a dva ñu samo prokomentarisati: 1. Meœutim. Jvn. Petrovo “pogledaj u nas” pojaåava napetost. Isus je otiãao Ocu i od onda pa do danas Hristovi sledbenici. u Isusovo ime. Zato. Takoœe. 3:1-16 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja. Isus je dao autoritet svojim uåenicima da u Njegovo ime åine joã veña åuda od onih koja je i On sam åinio dok je æiveo na zemlji (Lk. to ñu uåiniti. Ovo je velika istina. jer ja idem k Ocu. Kada je prizvano Isusovo ime da isceli bolest. Ako me ãto zamolite u moje ime. Nekada samo isceljuje. Stoga. 10:17-19. naglasak je moj). kaæem vam. i veña od ovih. i ãto god zaiãtete u moje ime. iako je u njemu Isus Nazareñanin ipak najvaæniji uåesnik. da se proslavi Otac u Sinu. . a Luka tako uokviravajuñi ozdravljenje uspeva izazvati najsnaæniji utisak kod åitatelja. Najverodostojnije i najjaåe dokaze o ovoj Isusovoj izjavi moæemo nañi u knjizi Dela apostolskih.

5:12-16 – Isus je kroz apostole leåio bolesnike.10 “U ime Isusa iz Nazareta” znaåi “autoritetom Isusa Hrista”. ili autoritet. Petar je dao do znanja. 11. propovedala reå. …”i vera – do koje dolazimo njegovim posredstvom – dala mu je potpuno zdravlje pred svima vama”.14 Zapravo. Ova åuda su oåitovala silu Mesije koji je bio razapet i vaskrsnut iz mrtvih i koji je i u ovakvim trenucima bio sa uåenicima. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 . i reåima i delom. ko mu je dao autoritet i moñ da isceljuje. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. nego i ozdravlja. 15.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 213 onda je moñno Isusovo ime poåelo delovati. stekli su poãtovanje. 54. Njegovo ime koje ne samo ãto opraãta (Dela 2:38). sila Boæija se kroz njih pokazivala u mnogim znacima i åudima. Dogaœala su se åuda. To je upravo ono ãto je Petar imao ( i dao) . ovde vidimo da se ispunila molitva apostola iz Dela 4:29-30. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. Carson: 1994: str.11 “Hriãñani imaju neãto mnogo bolje ãto mogu da podele. veñ Boæijom silom koja je delovala kroz Petra.posveñenje koje dolazi kroz veru u ime. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Apostoli nisu isceljivali svojom sopstvenom silom. Åuda ãto su ovde navedena nadilaze ona kojima su nas do sad obavestila Dela apostolska.13 Ljudi koji bi proãli pored Petrove senke ili ako je ona padala na bolesnike. Ovde se priseñamo masovnih ozdravljenja koja je Isus pre åinio. Isusa Hrista”12 Odgovor koji je dao apostol Petar u Delima 4:8-10 je jednak odgovoru koji je dao u Delima 4:16. i to ne Petrovom senkom. 1073. bili su isceljeni. 2. veñ silom Duha Svetog. U ovom odeljku se govori o mnogim åudima koja su se zbivala preko apostolskih ruku. 75.15 10 10 11 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. Koristeñi Isusovo ime. 1075.

U takvom mestu je Bog pokazao svoju silu kroz Pavla åinivãi neobiåna åuda. Meœutim. Ovaj odeljak nam govori o istom sluåaju kao i sa Petrom u 5:12-16. Ove reåi sadræe opis nesvakidaãnjih hriãñanskih åudesa. ova åuda su se odigrala u mestu u kojem je bilo mnogo crne magije i okultizma. 1096. o upotrebi nekog predmeta i dodira (Lk.dela koja ja åinim. dolazi do Pavla nakon nekoliko dana i polaæe ruke na njega da u ime Isusa progleda i ispuni se Duhom. 5:12. Jedan uåenik po imenu Ananija. 17 . Kada se apostol Pavle prvi put sreo sa vaskrslim Hristom na putu za Damask privremeno je ostao slep. 14:8-10 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja kroz Pavla. 6:19. 8:54. Åuda su imala znaåajnu ulogu u Isusovom delovanju (Dl. 2:22 i 10:38). 15. nas ne treba da iznenadi to da Bog moæe da isceljuje. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. bilo je logiåno da ta odeña nema snagu dok ne dotakne apostolovo telo. 19:11. Sa nekog rastojanja mu je snaænim glasom rekao da ustane. 5. 9:8-18 – Pavle je progledao nakon nekog vremena. Brojna åuda u Novom zavetu su zavisila. 13:13. veñ nas u ovom sluåaju pomalo iznenaœuje Lukin izveãtaj o naåinu isceljenja koji ne nalazimo ni u evanœeljima.214 Teoloãki åasopis.7. 22:51. 9:6.16 Drugo. 12 – Bog åini velika isceljenja i åuda kroz Pavla. 14:3). baã kao i ovde. Ljudi su pokuãavali uz pomoñ nekih magijskih formula da pokuãaju da åine åuda. Jvn. Verovatno je Pavle to uåinio u Isusovo ime da hromi prohoda iako to u tekstu nije jasno spomenuto. Dl. 16 16 17 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. N° 9 3. 221. 4. 5:13. kod åuda koja je Isus åinio17 (“. Buduñi da je Pavle bio posrednik u izvrãenju Boæijih åuda. Pavle je zapazio hromog åoveka kako pomno prati njegov govor i kako ima veru u spasenje. Luka je ovo zapisao namerno jer je smatrao da ova åuda nisu “obiåna”.. samo je Bog sada åinio åuda kroz Pavla. i veña od ovih…”). 9:12. 4:40.

sem fiziåkih. onda treba da. i oni su ozdravljali. Pavle je nastavio da sluæi drugima. 18 18 19 Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. Bog je sve ovo vodio i uåinio da Pavle i ostali sa broda budu dobro snabdeveni za put do Rima. kao i mnoge druge. postoje i duhovni aspetki bolesti. 28:7-9 – Pavle se moli za Pubijevog oca i on biva isceljen kao i mnogi drugi bolesnici na Malti. govori se samo da su bili poåaãñeni na mnoge naåine. Moæemo pretpostaviti da su Pavle i drugi hriãñani propovedali dobru vest i imali nekoliko uspeha. snaæno je uzdrmao æivote kapetana.20 Implikacije Kada su bolesti u pitanju. samo ili prvenstveno. ukoliko vidimo jasan duhovni uzrok bolesti. 19 20 20 . za koje åak smatram da su prioritetniji. ozdravljenje je doãlo kroz molitvu i polaganje Pavlovih ruku na bolesnika. treba se moliti za isceljenje da Bog ozdravi tu osobu. 293. imao je groznicu i srdobolju. vaæno mi je da napomenem da. Ovim istraæivanjem æelim da ukaæem da. ako posmatramo kompletno ljudsko biñe. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str.1199 Meœutim. Ne znamo jer se ne spominju zli duhovi kod sluåaja ove bolesti. 18 Otac ovog malteãkog vladara je bio bolestan. Svrhu bolesti nalazim u duhovnoj oblasti i zato smatram da nije dovoljno samo se fokusirati i leåiti fiziåke aspekte bolesti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 215 6. bolest bude tretirana na duhovni naåin. Pavlova molitva i polaganje ruku izleåili su ga. 81. åak i u poloæaju brodolomnika u okovima. Ne znamo da li Luka ovde implicira egzorcizam. Neki pisci komentrara misle da ih je izleåio lekar Luka koji je bio sa Pavlom. Ovo ozdravljenje je privuklo mnoge da doœu kod Pavla iz istog razloga. Zbog toga. iako tekst ne govori o tome. 1106. glavnog zvaniånika Malte. danas ñemo prvenstveno pomisliti na lekare i traæiñemo njihovo miãljenje. Samo na ovom putovanju. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. dijagnoze i terapije.

13. 33.21 Slaæem se sa Andersonom. 11:14-15) i iz onih poremeñena uma (Mt. Isterivao je demone iz slepih i nemih (Mt. 8:26-39). N° 9 Dakle. on ustanovljava tri uzroka bolesti: greh. Anderson:2002: str. izbegavam ovde da generalizujem ili da iznosim neke zakljuåke koji bi u ovoj oblasti doveli do neke vrste iskljuåivosti. 9:14-29. 9:32-34. Mk. 8:7). Dl. Isceljivanje bolesti i izgon demona nije uvek jedno te isto (Mk. Zato. Mt. 7:21. Lk. moæemo se zapitati sledeñe: da li su demoni uzrok bolesti? Novi zavet navodi mnoge primere gde su demoni uzroånici bolesti. Lk. 12:22. 1:34. Lk. 5:16. ovde su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Kada dr Peter H. padavice ili drugih bolesti uzrok delovanje demona. Kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti.23 Pogreãna dijagnoza opsednutosti demonima moæe imati katastrofalne posledice na nekoga ko je duãevno ili emocionalno bolestan pa to moæe uzrokovati snaæan oseñaj krivice i oseñaj da ih je Bog odbacio. Demoni mogu biti uzrok bolesti. ali ne smemo misliti da je u svakom sluåaju slepoñe. Bog i demonske sile. 68. 9:37-43). 115. 17:14-21.22 Kada su u pitanju duãevne bolesti.216 Teoloãki åasopis. Isus je iz deåaka isterao demona padavice (Mt. “ne tvrdim da je svaki duhovni problem rezultat direktne demonske aktivnosti. Pavle objaãnjava da neki u Korintu su slabi i bolesni zato ãto je njihov greh bio to ãto nisu 21 21 22 Vidi: Oropeza: 2001: str. Lk. 8:28-34. Oropeza citira Basil Jackson: Oropeza: 2001: str. U I Kor. Zaista trebam odgovore na ovakva pitanja i verujem da se odgovor razlikuje od sluåaja do sluåaja. 22 23 23 . neizobraæenih ljudi napravilo je viãe ãtete nego dobra prepoznavajuñi demone ondje gdje ih nije bilo”. 8:16. Mk. 5:1-20. pa åak i duhovnog fanatizma. Previãe revnih. 11:30. 69. Davids govori u knjizi “Wrestiling with dark angels”o bolestima s duhovnih aspekata. Greh je uzrok bolesti. Ovo se moæe izbeñi ako se osoba uputi na odgovarajuñe psihijatrijsko leåenje. Ali moæeã biti u ropstvu jer si previdio ili zanijekao realnost demonskih sila koje su na djelu u danaãnjem svijetu”. “nemojte pobrkati duãevni poremeñaj s demonom.

Varisus (Dl. i joã neki mogu se direktno putem Duha Svetoga dovesti u vezu kod nekih osoba koje su zgreãile i obolele.25 Istina je da je ljusko biñe zbog pada u greh postalo podloæno mnogim vrstama bolesti. Zato smatram da je potrebno otiñi kod lekara i posavetovati se sa 24 24 25 Vidi: Wagner: 1990: str. Meœutim. 13:6-12). Ljudsko telo koje je Bog savrãeno stvorio nakon pada u greh ne funkcioniãe onako kako ga je Bog naåinio da funkcioniãe. 25 . lakomstva. Milaãinoviñ: 1995: str. Meœutim. kao ãto je i dr Davidson naveo neke svetopisamske primere. Bog je uzrok bolesti. 11). Ako je greh uzrok bolesti. i to je Boæiji dar. 12:20-23). Luka 13:10-17 govori o æeni koja je zgråena oko 18 godina od “duha bolesti”. 218-221. da li je Bog ikada uzrok bolesti? U Starom zavetu jeste (II Kr. Ljudska istraæivanja o raznim bolestima i o njihovom leåenju su dostigla visok nivo. Mada. vraåarstva i idolopoklonstva.24 Dimitrije Kaleziñ smatra da je ljudsko biñe inficirano grehom i da je greh najåeãñi uzrok bolesti (neåiste sile ni ne spominje). U Novom zavetu su demoske sile viãe u vezi sa bolestima nego ãto je Bog. Gresi neopraãtanja i nepomirenja.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 217 uvaæavali jedinstvo u Telu kao Gospodnju veåeru. 15:5) a i u Novom zavetu: Irod Agripa (Dl. U I Kor. Demonske sile su uzrok bolesti. On smatra da do isceljenja od takve bolesti se dolazi ako je åovekova liånost okrenuta “Bogu radi unutraãnje ili mistiåne saradnje – to je uslov za zdravlje. 5:5. gresi neverja poput odbacivanja milostivoga Boga ili ravnoduãnosti. Pavle zapoveda crkvama da odbace sramne greãnike koje ñe Satana uzeti za “propast tela”. Verujem. Zato nam je od velike pomoñi klasiåna medicina koja u danaãnje vreme åini skoro åuda. i samo zdravlje”. uzeo bih to kao izuzetke ali ne i kao pravilo. Smatram da Bog dozvoljava bolest zbog odreœenog cilja. kao u sluåaju Jova da je Bog dozvolio Satani da iskuãa Jova i na taj naåin. ne bih se sasvim sloæio sa dr Davidson u vezi toga da je Bog uzrok bolesti. Korinñani (I Kor. smatram da Bog ponekad interveniãe i na taj naåin. 121-124.

kao Boæiji dar. Ispovedajte. Ãto se tiåe bele magije. dakle. pa neka se pomole nad njim i pomaæu ga uljem u ime Gospodnje. ako je neko bolestan i ne moæe da ozdravi treba da zna da je duãa vaænija od tela i da treba da se mnogo viãe fokusira na spasenje svoje duãe kroz veru u Isusa Hrista.218 Teoloãki åasopis. biñe mu oproãteno. bolest moæe biti samo prosto oboljenje neåega. Kada razmiãljam o duhovnim aspektima bolesti mislim samo na jedno reãenje: vera u Isusa Hrista. S druge strane. jedan drugome grehe i molite se Bogu 26 Milaãinoviñ: 1995: Unutraãnja stranica na poleœinskoj korici knjige. N° 9 njima kada smo bolesni. “dobronamerna”. Ukoliko Bog i klasiåna medicina. i Gospod ñe ga podiñi. odnosno unesreñe”. ako je i uåinio grehe. Drugim reåima. smatram da je ona od œavola iako se pokazuje kao pozitivna. 26 . Izmeœu ostalog. I molitva vere spaãñe bolesnika. kao moñnog Isceljitelja. da pravimo neki univerzalni duhovni recept. koje u svojoj alebiciji hoñe da nas usreñe. Religiozna oseñanja. Trebamo molitvom priñi Bogu i traæiti vodstvo Svetoga Duha da nam razjasni i da silu da reãimo odreœenu situaciju kada je bolest u pitanju. 26 Sveto pismo nam kaæe ãta da åinimo kada su u pitanju bolesti: “Boluje li ko meœu vama? Neka dozove crkvene stareãine. Inaåe. nemojmo uvek smatrati da je u pitanju neki demon jer je vrlo lako moguñe da je u pitanju samo neka telesna bolest koju ñe lekari reãiti bez ikakve muke. Strikoviñem. pre svega. smatram da tu nema nikakve druge ãanse da se åovek izleåi na ispravan naåin. kroz krizu verovanja. Slaæem se sa dr Jovanom N. “kriza savremene civilizacije prepoznaje se. sile i one druge. kao imanentna potreba i spiritus movens naãe egzistencije jesu tvrœava na koje su kidisale sile neåastive. trebamo koristititi i taj Boæiji dar. ne izleåe åoveka. Bela magija pokuãava da otkloni bolest jer ne moæe da izleåi åoveka. Zakljuåio bih da ne bi bilo mudro da pokuãamo da gradimo bilo kakvu generalizaciju o bolestima na osnovu izabranih svetopisamskih odlomaka.

A. Dæejms 1999 Luka: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. . Ovo je po mom miãljenju prvi korak kada su u pitanju bolesti. Galvin C. 5:14-16 naglasci su moji!). Ne moæe se ni opstati ni ostati bez njenog udela!”27 Vera je kljuå. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. Zato trebamo znati da “smisao naãeg æivota i æivljenja nije u onom smislu koji ñe odrediti neko drugi veñ u egzistenciji vere. ispovedanje greha. prihvatiti. 1994 New bible commentary.” (Jak. su za mene prvi i kljuåni postupci pri ozdravljenju ili isceljenju bolesnika. kojom se oznaåava vrhunska strast kao vera.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 219 jedan za drugoga. voleti. Molitva vere. posredniåka delotvorna molitva pravednika i isceljivanje u ime Gospodnje (u ime Isusa Hrista). da budete isceljeni. CITIRANA DELA Anderson T. 27 27 Isto. Mnogo moæe delotvorna molitva pravednika. usvojiti bez prisustva vere. Zaista. niãta se ne moæe razumeti. Daruvar. Neil 2002 On lomi okove. Downers Grove. Illinois: IVP. Hrvatska: Logos Daruvar. Lee Ash Antony 1986 Djela apostolska: tumaåenje Djela apostolskih. ur. Ovi stihovi nam govore kako da najpravilnije postupimo da ne bismo napravili katastrofalne greãke. Carson D.

Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. Javier. Kalifornija.A. N° 9 Milaãinoviñ Jasmina 1995 Religija i duãevni æivot åoveka. IZDANJE BIBLIJSKOG DRUÃTVA BEOGRAD. Oropeza B. Moris Leon 1983 Luka: tumaåenje Evanœelja po Luki. Wagner C. Beograd: ZAVOD ZA BOLESTI ZAVISNOSTI I PARTENON M.A. Verman R. 2000 O anœelima. Novi zavet: prevod dr Emilijana M. demonima i duhovnom ratovanju: 99 pitanja i odgovora. U. Zagreb. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST.220 Teoloãki åasopis.S. . Peter 1990 Wrestling with dark angels.M.: Regal Books. Hrvatska: STEPress. David 2001 Dela apostolska: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Åarniña. Ventura.